On 2018/7/7 5:09, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> Let's flush journal nat entries for speed up in the next run.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaeg...@kernel.org>
> ---
>  fs/f2fs/node.c | 7 +++++++
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/node.c b/fs/f2fs/node.c
> index 29237aeca041..0f076fb0d828 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/node.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/node.c
> @@ -2613,6 +2613,13 @@ void f2fs_flush_nat_entries(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, 
> struct cp_control *cpc)
>       nid_t set_idx = 0;
>       LIST_HEAD(sets);
>  
> +     /* during unmount, let's flush nat_bits before checking dirty_nat_cnt */
> +     if (enabled_nat_bits(sbi, cpc)) {
> +             down_write(&nm_i->nat_tree_lock);
> +             remove_nats_in_journal(sbi);
> +             up_write(&nm_i->nat_tree_lock);
> +     }

The case will cover that nm_i->dirty_nat_cnt is zero and there is cached nats in
journal?

So enabled_nat_bits() below should be removed?

        if (enabled_nat_bits(sbi, cpc) ||
                !__has_cursum_space(journal, nm_i->dirty_nat_cnt, NAT_JOURNAL))
                remove_nats_in_journal(sbi);

Thanks,

> +
>       if (!nm_i->dirty_nat_cnt)
>               return;
>  
> 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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

Reply via email to