On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 10:32:07AM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > +Cc Sahitya, > > On 2019/5/24 9:55, sunqiuyang wrote: > > From: Qiuyang Sun <[email protected]> > > > > This ioctl shrinks a given length (aligned to sections) from end of the > > main area. Any cursegs and valid blocks will be moved out before > > invalidating the range. > > > > This feature can be used for adjusting partition sizes online. > > -- > > Changlog v1 ==> v2: > > > > Sahitya Tummala: > > - Add this ioctl for f2fs_compat_ioctl() as well. > > - Fix debugfs status to reflect the online resize changes. > > - Fix potential race between online resize path and allocate new data > > block path or gc path. > > > > Others: > > - Rename some identifiers. > > - Add some error handling branches. > > - Clear sbi->next_victim_seg[BG_GC/FG_GC] in shrinking range. > > -- > > Changelog v2 ==> v3: > > Implement this interface as ext4's, and change the parameter from shrunk > > bytes to new block count of F2FS. > > -- > > Changelog v3 ==> v4: > > - During resizing, force to empty sit_journal and forbid adding new > > entries to it, in order to avoid invalid segno in journal after resize. > > - Reduce sbi->user_block_count before resize starts. > > - Commit the updated superblock first, and then update in-memory metadata > > only when the former succeeds. > > - Target block count must align to sections. > > -- > > Changelog v4 ==> v5: > > Write checkpoint before and after committing the new superblock, w/o > > CP_FSCK_FLAG respectively, so that the FS can be fixed by fsck even if > > resize fails after the new superblock is committed. > > -- > > Changelog v5 ==> v6: > > - In free_segment_range(), reduce granularity of gc_mutex. > > - Add protection on curseg migration. > > > > Signed-off-by: Qiuyang Sun <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Sahitya Tummala <[email protected]> > > Looks good to me now, > > Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <[email protected]> > > To Sahitya, is it okay to you merging all your fixes and adding Signed-off in > original patch? We can still separate them from this patch if you object this, > let us know. >
Hi Chao, I am okay with merging. Thanks, Sahitya. > Thanks, -- -- Sent by a consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
