Hi Greg, Could you please consider to cherry-pick this patch in stable-6.9, since there are many users suffering from unnecessary fsck runs during boot?
You can get this from Linus's tree by (b864ddb57eb0 "f2fs: fix false alarm on invalid block address") Thanks, On 05/20, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > f2fs_ra_meta_pages can try to read ahead on invalid block address which is > not the corruption case. > > Cc: <sta...@kernel.org> # v6.9+ > Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=218770 > Fixes: 31f85ccc84b8 ("f2fs: unify the error handling of > f2fs_is_valid_blkaddr") > Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <c...@kernel.org> > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaeg...@kernel.org> > --- > fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c | 9 +++++---- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c > index 5d05a413f451..55d444bec5c0 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c > +++ b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c > @@ -179,22 +179,22 @@ static bool __f2fs_is_valid_blkaddr(struct f2fs_sb_info > *sbi, > break; > case META_SIT: > if (unlikely(blkaddr >= SIT_BLK_CNT(sbi))) > - goto err; > + goto check_only; > break; > case META_SSA: > if (unlikely(blkaddr >= MAIN_BLKADDR(sbi) || > blkaddr < SM_I(sbi)->ssa_blkaddr)) > - goto err; > + goto check_only; > break; > case META_CP: > if (unlikely(blkaddr >= SIT_I(sbi)->sit_base_addr || > blkaddr < __start_cp_addr(sbi))) > - goto err; > + goto check_only; > break; > case META_POR: > if (unlikely(blkaddr >= MAX_BLKADDR(sbi) || > blkaddr < MAIN_BLKADDR(sbi))) > - goto err; > + goto check_only; > break; > case DATA_GENERIC: > case DATA_GENERIC_ENHANCE: > @@ -228,6 +228,7 @@ static bool __f2fs_is_valid_blkaddr(struct f2fs_sb_info > *sbi, > return true; > err: > f2fs_handle_error(sbi, ERROR_INVALID_BLKADDR); > +check_only: > return false; > } > > -- > 2.45.0.rc1.225.g2a3ae87e7f-goog _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
