On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 6:19 PM Chao Yu <c...@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On 1/9/25 10:23, 臧阳阳 wrote:
> > Jaegeuk Kim <jaeg...@kernel.org> 于2025年1月9日周四 02:29写道：
> >
> >>
> >> On 01/06, zangyangyang wrote:
> >>> From: zangyangyang1 <zangyangya...@xiaomi.com>
> >>>
> >>> When f2fs_write_single_data_page fails, f2fs_write_cache_pages
> >>> will use the last 'submitted' value incorrectly, which will cause
> >>> 'nwritten' and 'wbc->nr_to_write' calculation errors
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: zangyangyang1 <zangyangya...@xiaomi.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> v3: No logical changes, just format patch
> >>> v2: Initialize "submitted" in f2fs_write_single_data_page()
> >>> ---
> >>> fs/f2fs/data.c | 3 +++
> >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> >>> index 94f7b084f601..f772fbc7f331 100644
> >>> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> >>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> >>> @@ -2816,6 +2816,9 @@ int f2fs_write_single_data_page(struct folio
> >>> *folio, int *submitted,
> >>>
> >>> trace_f2fs_writepage(folio, DATA);
> >>>
> >>> + if (submitted)
> >>> + *submitted = 0;
> >>
> >> I don't think this is correct, as callers should handle it.
> >
> > Hi, Chao, what do you think?
>
> Both are fine to me, previously I suggest to handle it in
> f2fs_write_single_data_page(), because I'm worried about we may miss to handle
> it in any possible caller in further.
Thank you very much, Chao.
Hi, Kim, If you still think callers should handle it, I'll send a new patch.
Thanks,
>
> Thanks,
>
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >>
> >>> +
> >>> /* we should bypass data pages to proceed the kworker jobs */
> >>> if (unlikely(f2fs_cp_error(sbi))) {
> >>> mapping_set_error(folio->mapping, -EIO);
> >>> --
> >>> 2.43.2
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
