On 01/12, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2023/1/12 2:50, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 01/11, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > On 2023/1/11 9:20, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > In f2fs_update_inode_page, f2fs_get_node_page handles EIO along with
> > > > f2fs_handle_page_eio that stops checkpoint, if the disk couldn't be
> > > > recovered.
> > > > As a result, we don't need to stop checkpoint right away given single
> > > > EIO.
> > >
> > > f2fs_handle_page_eio() only covers the case that EIO occurs on the same
> > > page, should we cover the case EIO occurs on different pages?
> >
> > Which case are you looking at?
>
> - __get_node_page(PageA) - __get_node_page(PageB)
> - f2fs_handle_page_eio
> - sbi->page_eio_ofs[type] = PageA->index
> - f2fs_handle_page_eio
> - sbi->page_eio_ofs[type] =
> PageB->index
>
> In such race case, it may has low probability to set CP_ERROR_FLAG as we
> expect?
Do you see that case in products?
I'm trying to avoid setting CP_ERROR_FLAG here.
>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
> > > > Signed-off-by: Randall Huang <huangrand...@google.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaeg...@kernel.org>
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > Change log from v1:
> > > > - fix a bug
> > > >
> > > > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 2 +-
> > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > > index ff6cf66ed46b..2ed7a621fdf1 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c
> > > > @@ -719,7 +719,7 @@ void f2fs_update_inode_page(struct inode *inode)
> > > > if (IS_ERR(node_page)) {
> > > > int err = PTR_ERR(node_page);
> > > > - if (err == -ENOMEM) {
> > > > + if (err == -ENOMEM || (err == -EIO &&
> > > > !f2fs_cp_error(sbi))) {
> > > > cond_resched();
> > > > goto retry;
> > > > } else if (err != -ENOENT) {
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
