Hi, Chao
On 2018/7/1 10:22, Chao Yu wrote:
> Hi Junling,
>
> On 2018/6/29 18:11, Junling Zheng wrote:
>> Only dump nat info of nids inside the specified range.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Junling Zheng <zhengjunl...@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> fsck/dump.c | 79 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------------
>> fsck/fsck.h | 2 +-
>> fsck/main.c | 4 +--
>> 3 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fsck/dump.c b/fsck/dump.c
>> index 9236a43..89cff83 100644
>> --- a/fsck/dump.c
>> +++ b/fsck/dump.c
>> @@ -31,32 +31,34 @@ const char *seg_type_name[SEG_TYPE_MAX + 1] = {
>> "SEG_TYPE_NONE",
>> };
>>
>> -void nat_dump(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
>> +void nat_dump(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, int start_nat, int end_nat)
>> {
>> - struct f2fs_super_block *sb = F2FS_RAW_SUPER(sbi);
>> struct f2fs_nm_info *nm_i = NM_I(sbi);
>> struct f2fs_nat_block *nat_block;
>> struct f2fs_node *node_block;
>> - u32 nr_nat_blks, nid;
>> + u32 nid;
>> pgoff_t block_off;
>> pgoff_t block_addr;
>> char buf[BUF_SZ];
>> int seg_off;
>> int fd, ret, pack;
>> - unsigned int i;
>>
>> nat_block = (struct f2fs_nat_block *)calloc(BLOCK_SZ, 1);
>
> move ASSERT(nat_block) here.
>
Yeah, right.
>> node_block = (struct f2fs_node *)calloc(BLOCK_SZ, 1);
>> ASSERT(nat_block);
>> -
>> - nr_nat_blks = get_sb(segment_count_nat) <<
>> - (sbi->log_blocks_per_seg - 1);
>> + ASSERT(node_block);
>>
>> fd = open("dump_nat", O_CREAT|O_WRONLY|O_TRUNC, 0666);
>> ASSERT(fd >= 0);
>>
>> - for (block_off = 0; block_off < nr_nat_blks; pack = 1, block_off++) {
>> + for (nid = start_nat; nid < end_nat; pack = 1, nid++) {
>> + struct f2fs_nat_entry raw_nat;
>> + struct node_info ni;
>> + if(nid == 0 || nid == 1 || nid == 2 )
>
> minor cleanup
>
> if (nid == 0 || nid == F2FS_NODE_INO(sbi) || nid == F2FS_META_INO(sbi))
>
OK.
>> + continue;
>>
>> + ni.nid = nid;
>> + block_off = nid / NAT_ENTRY_PER_BLOCK;
>> seg_off = block_off >> sbi->log_blocks_per_seg;
>> block_addr = (pgoff_t)(nm_i->nat_blkaddr +
>> (seg_off << sbi->log_blocks_per_seg << 1) +
>> @@ -67,42 +69,11 @@ void nat_dump(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
>> pack = 2;
>> }
>>
>> - ret = dev_read_block(nat_block, block_addr);
>> - ASSERT(ret >= 0);
>> -
>> - nid = block_off * NAT_ENTRY_PER_BLOCK;
>> - for (i = 0; i < NAT_ENTRY_PER_BLOCK; i++) {
>> - struct f2fs_nat_entry raw_nat;
>> - struct node_info ni;
>> - ni.nid = nid + i;
>> -
>> - if(nid + i == 0 || nid + i == 1 || nid + i == 2 )
>> - continue;
>> - if (lookup_nat_in_journal(sbi, nid + i,
>> - &raw_nat) >= 0) {
>> - node_info_from_raw_nat(&ni, &raw_nat);
>> - ret = dev_read_block(node_block, ni.blk_addr);
>> - ASSERT(ret >= 0);
>> - if (ni.blk_addr != 0x0) {
>> - memset(buf, 0, BUF_SZ);
>> - snprintf(buf, BUF_SZ,
>> - "nid:%5u\tino:%5u\toffset:%5u"
>> - "\tblkaddr:%10u\tpack:%d\n",
>> - ni.nid, ni.ino,
>> -
>> le32_to_cpu(node_block->footer.flag) >>
>> - OFFSET_BIT_SHIFT,
>> - ni.blk_addr, pack);
>> - ret = write(fd, buf, strlen(buf));
>> - ASSERT(ret >= 0);
>> - }
>> - } else {
>> - node_info_from_raw_nat(&ni,
>> - &nat_block->entries[i]);
>> - if (ni.blk_addr == 0)
>> - continue;
>> -
>> - ret = dev_read_block(node_block, ni.blk_addr);
>> - ASSERT(ret >= 0);
>> + if (lookup_nat_in_journal(sbi, nid, &raw_nat) >= 0) {
>> + node_info_from_raw_nat(&ni, &raw_nat);
>> + ret = dev_read_block(node_block, ni.blk_addr);
>> + ASSERT(ret >= 0);
>> + if (ni.blk_addr != 0x0) {
>> memset(buf, 0, BUF_SZ);
>> snprintf(buf, BUF_SZ,
>> "nid:%5u\tino:%5u\toffset:%5u"
>> @@ -114,6 +85,26 @@ void nat_dump(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
>> ret = write(fd, buf, strlen(buf));
>> ASSERT(ret >= 0);
>> }
>> + } else {
>> + ret = dev_read_block(nat_block, block_addr);
>> + ASSERT(ret >= 0);
>> + node_info_from_raw_nat(&ni,
>> + &nat_block->entries[nid %
>> NAT_ENTRY_PER_BLOCK]);
>> + if (ni.blk_addr == 0)
>> + continue;
>> +
>> + ret = dev_read_block(node_block, ni.blk_addr);
>> + ASSERT(ret >= 0);
>> + memset(buf, 0, BUF_SZ);
>> + snprintf(buf, BUF_SZ,
>> + "nid:%5u\tino:%5u\toffset:%5u"
>> + "\tblkaddr:%10u\tpack:%d\n",
>> + ni.nid, ni.ino,
>> + le32_to_cpu(node_block->footer.flag) >>
>> + OFFSET_BIT_SHIFT,
>> + ni.blk_addr, pack);
>> + ret = write(fd, buf, strlen(buf));
>> + ASSERT(ret >= 0);
>> }
>> }
>>
>> diff --git a/fsck/fsck.h b/fsck/fsck.h
>> index 5530aff..0916e30 100644
>> --- a/fsck/fsck.h
>> +++ b/fsck/fsck.h
>> @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ struct dump_option {
>> int32_t blk_addr;
>> };
>>
>> -extern void nat_dump(struct f2fs_sb_info *);
>> +extern void nat_dump(struct f2fs_sb_info *, int, int);
>> extern void sit_dump(struct f2fs_sb_info *, unsigned int, unsigned int);
>> extern void ssa_dump(struct f2fs_sb_info *, int, int);
>> extern void dump_node(struct f2fs_sb_info *, nid_t, int);
>> diff --git a/fsck/main.c b/fsck/main.c
>> index f6d12b0..714e28a 100644
>> --- a/fsck/main.c
>> +++ b/fsck/main.c
>> @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ void dump_usage()
>> MSG(0, "[options]:\n");
>> MSG(0, " -d debug level [default:0]\n");
>> MSG(0, " -i inode no (hex)\n");
>> - MSG(0, " -n [NAT dump segno from #1~#2 (decimal), for all 0~-1]\n");
>
> Original interface was going to dump NAT entries with segment granularity, how
> about just keeping old definition of this interface. Although if we can
> support
> dumping with smaller granularity will be good, but I don't think there is be
> such demand.
>
I don't think "original interface was going to dump NAT entries with segment
granularity", because opt->end_nat = NM_I(sbi)->max_nid, which is calculated
with node granularity in do_dump, so I prefer to think it's a typo here :)
> Thanks,
>
>> + MSG(0, " -n [NAT dump nid from #1~#2 (decimal), for all 0~-1]\n");
>> MSG(0, " -s [SIT dump segno from #1~#2 (decimal), for all 0~-1]\n");
>> MSG(0, " -S sparse_mode\n");
>> MSG(0, " -a [SSA dump segno from #1~#2 (decimal), for all 0~-1]\n");
>> @@ -645,7 +645,7 @@ static void do_dump(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
>> if (opt->end_ssa == -1)
>> opt->end_ssa = SM_I(sbi)->main_segments;
>> if (opt->start_nat != -1)
>> - nat_dump(sbi);
>> + nat_dump(sbi, opt->start_nat, opt->end_nat);
>> if (opt->start_sit != -1)
>> sit_dump(sbi, opt->start_sit, opt->end_sit);
>> if (opt->start_ssa != -1)
>>
>
> .
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
