On 09/09, Chao Yu wrote: > On 2019/9/9 16:06, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > On 09/09, Chao Yu wrote: > >> On 2019/9/9 9:25, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > >>> GC must avoid select the same victim again. > >> > >> Blocks in previous victim will occupy addition free segment, I doubt after > >> this > >> change, FGGC may encounter out-of-free space issue more frequently. > > > > Hmm, actually this change seems wrong by sec_usage_check(). > > We may be able to avoid this only in the suspicious loop? > > > > --- > > fs/f2fs/gc.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c > > index e88f98ddf396..5877bd729689 100644 > > --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c > > @@ -1326,7 +1326,7 @@ int f2fs_gc(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, bool sync, > > round++; > > } > > > > - if (gc_type == FG_GC) > > + if (gc_type == FG_GC && seg_freed) > > That's original solution Sahitya provided to avoid infinite loop of GC, but I > suggest to find the root cause first, then we added .invalid_segmap for that > purpose.
I've checked the Sahitya's patch. So, it seems the problem can happen due to is_alive or atomic_file. > > Thanks, > > > sbi->cur_victim_sec = NULL_SEGNO; > > > > if (sync) > >
