On 2023/2/15 10:48, Yonggil Song wrote:
>> When f2fs skipped a gc round during victim migration, there was a bug which
>> would skip all upcoming gc rounds unconditionally because skipped_gc_rwsem
>> was not initialized. It fixes the bug by correctly initializing the
>> skipped_gc_rwsem inside the gc loop.
>
>It makes sense to me.
>
>>
>> Fixes: d147ea4adb96 ("f2fs: introduce f2fs_gc_control to consolidate f2fs_gc
>> parameters")
>
>How does this commits introduce the bug?
Oh, sorry I've got wrong hash.
I'll send right hash on PATCH v2.
Thanks for your comment.
>
>Thanks,
>
>> Signed-off-by: Yonggil Song <yonggil.s...@samsung.com>
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>> index b22f49a6f128..81d326abaac1 100644
>> --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>> @@ -1786,8 +1786,8 @@ int f2fs_gc(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct
>> f2fs_gc_control *gc_control)
>> prefree_segments(sbi));
>>
>> cpc.reason = __get_cp_reason(sbi);
>> - sbi->skipped_gc_rwsem = 0;
>> gc_more:
>> + sbi->skipped_gc_rwsem = 0;
>> if (unlikely(!(sbi->sb->s_flags & SB_ACTIVE))) {
>> ret = -EINVAL;
>> goto stop;
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
