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