Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix some cases with reserved_blocks

2017-08-08 Thread Chao Yu
On 2017/8/8 14:33, Yunlong Song wrote:
> Does this means the reserved_blocks cannot be used by users by can be 
> used by filesystem?

Yup.

> If it can be used by filesystem, then this cannot ensure the flash 
> device really reserve the
> reserved_blocks space, right? The reserved_blocks is just for users?

No, only if we didn't issue any discards, otherwise we can benefit from less GC
overhead in device due to higher over-provision rate.

Thanks,

> 
> On 2017/8/8 14:08, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2017/8/8 12:12, Yunlong Song wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song 
>>> ---
>>>   fs/f2fs/recovery.c | 3 ++-
>>>   fs/f2fs/super.c| 9 +
>>>   2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/recovery.c b/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
>>> index a3d0261..e288319 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
>>> @@ -51,7 +51,8 @@ bool space_for_roll_forward(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
>>>   {
>>> s64 nalloc = percpu_counter_sum_positive(&sbi->alloc_valid_block_count);
>>>   
>>> -   if (sbi->last_valid_block_count + nalloc > sbi->user_block_count)
>>> +   if (sbi->last_valid_block_count + nalloc +
>>> +   sbi->reserved_blocks > sbi->user_block_count)
>> I think we can treat reserved blocks as over-provision space in f2fs, so it
>> would be safe to store invalid data (may become valid during recovery) there.
>> Anyway, it OK to remain old condition judgment.
>>
>>> return false;
>>> return true;
>>>   }
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c
>>> index 4c1bdcb..c644bf5 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c
>>> @@ -946,6 +946,7 @@ static int f2fs_statfs(struct dentry *dentry, struct 
>>> kstatfs *buf)
>>> u64 id = huge_encode_dev(sb->s_bdev->bd_dev);
>>> block_t total_count, user_block_count, start_count, ovp_count;
>>> u64 avail_node_count;
>>> +   block_t avail_user_block_count;
>>>   
>>> total_count = le64_to_cpu(sbi->raw_super->block_count);
>>> user_block_count = sbi->user_block_count;
>>> @@ -953,16 +954,16 @@ static int f2fs_statfs(struct dentry *dentry, struct 
>>> kstatfs *buf)
>>> ovp_count = SM_I(sbi)->ovp_segments << sbi->log_blocks_per_seg;
>>> buf->f_type = F2FS_SUPER_MAGIC;
>>> buf->f_bsize = sbi->blocksize;
>>> +   avail_user_block_count = user_block_count - sbi->reserved_blocks;
>>>   
>>> buf->f_blocks = total_count - start_count;
>>> buf->f_bfree = user_block_count - valid_user_blocks(sbi) + ovp_count;
>>> -   buf->f_bavail = user_block_count - valid_user_blocks(sbi) -
>>> -   sbi->reserved_blocks;
>>> +   buf->f_bavail = avail_user_block_count - valid_user_blocks(sbi);
>>>   
>>> avail_node_count = sbi->total_node_count - F2FS_RESERVED_NODE_NUM;
>>>   
>>> -   if (avail_node_count > user_block_count) {
>>> -   buf->f_files = user_block_count;
>>> +   if (avail_node_count > avail_user_block_count) {
>> Likewise f_blocks calculation, the f_files one doesn't need to consider
>> reserved_blocks.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>> +   buf->f_files = avail_user_block_count;
>>> buf->f_ffree = buf->f_bavail;
>>> } else {
>>> buf->f_files = avail_node_count;
>>>
>>
>> .
>>
> 


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel


Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix some cases with reserved_blocks

2017-08-07 Thread Yunlong Song
Does this means the reserved_blocks cannot be used by users by can be 
used by filesystem?
If it can be used by filesystem, then this cannot ensure the flash 
device really reserve the

reserved_blocks space, right? The reserved_blocks is just for users?

On 2017/8/8 14:08, Chao Yu wrote:

On 2017/8/8 12:12, Yunlong Song wrote:

Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song 
---
  fs/f2fs/recovery.c | 3 ++-
  fs/f2fs/super.c| 9 +
  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/fs/f2fs/recovery.c b/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
index a3d0261..e288319 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
@@ -51,7 +51,8 @@ bool space_for_roll_forward(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
  {
s64 nalloc = percpu_counter_sum_positive(&sbi->alloc_valid_block_count);
  
-	if (sbi->last_valid_block_count + nalloc > sbi->user_block_count)

+   if (sbi->last_valid_block_count + nalloc +
+   sbi->reserved_blocks > sbi->user_block_count)

I think we can treat reserved blocks as over-provision space in f2fs, so it
would be safe to store invalid data (may become valid during recovery) there.
Anyway, it OK to remain old condition judgment.


return false;
return true;
  }
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c
index 4c1bdcb..c644bf5 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/super.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c
@@ -946,6 +946,7 @@ static int f2fs_statfs(struct dentry *dentry, struct 
kstatfs *buf)
u64 id = huge_encode_dev(sb->s_bdev->bd_dev);
block_t total_count, user_block_count, start_count, ovp_count;
u64 avail_node_count;
+   block_t avail_user_block_count;
  
  	total_count = le64_to_cpu(sbi->raw_super->block_count);

user_block_count = sbi->user_block_count;
@@ -953,16 +954,16 @@ static int f2fs_statfs(struct dentry *dentry, struct 
kstatfs *buf)
ovp_count = SM_I(sbi)->ovp_segments << sbi->log_blocks_per_seg;
buf->f_type = F2FS_SUPER_MAGIC;
buf->f_bsize = sbi->blocksize;
+   avail_user_block_count = user_block_count - sbi->reserved_blocks;
  
  	buf->f_blocks = total_count - start_count;

buf->f_bfree = user_block_count - valid_user_blocks(sbi) + ovp_count;
-   buf->f_bavail = user_block_count - valid_user_blocks(sbi) -
-   sbi->reserved_blocks;
+   buf->f_bavail = avail_user_block_count - valid_user_blocks(sbi);
  
  	avail_node_count = sbi->total_node_count - F2FS_RESERVED_NODE_NUM;
  
-	if (avail_node_count > user_block_count) {

-   buf->f_files = user_block_count;
+   if (avail_node_count > avail_user_block_count) {

Likewise f_blocks calculation, the f_files one doesn't need to consider
reserved_blocks.

Thanks,


+   buf->f_files = avail_user_block_count;
buf->f_ffree = buf->f_bavail;
} else {
buf->f_files = avail_node_count;



.



--
Thanks,
Yunlong Song



--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel


Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix some cases with reserved_blocks

2017-08-07 Thread Chao Yu
On 2017/8/8 12:12, Yunlong Song wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song 
> ---
>  fs/f2fs/recovery.c | 3 ++-
>  fs/f2fs/super.c| 9 +
>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/recovery.c b/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
> index a3d0261..e288319 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/recovery.c
> @@ -51,7 +51,8 @@ bool space_for_roll_forward(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
>  {
>   s64 nalloc = percpu_counter_sum_positive(&sbi->alloc_valid_block_count);
>  
> - if (sbi->last_valid_block_count + nalloc > sbi->user_block_count)
> + if (sbi->last_valid_block_count + nalloc +
> + sbi->reserved_blocks > sbi->user_block_count)

I think we can treat reserved blocks as over-provision space in f2fs, so it
would be safe to store invalid data (may become valid during recovery) there.
Anyway, it OK to remain old condition judgment.

>   return false;
>   return true;
>  }
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c
> index 4c1bdcb..c644bf5 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c
> @@ -946,6 +946,7 @@ static int f2fs_statfs(struct dentry *dentry, struct 
> kstatfs *buf)
>   u64 id = huge_encode_dev(sb->s_bdev->bd_dev);
>   block_t total_count, user_block_count, start_count, ovp_count;
>   u64 avail_node_count;
> + block_t avail_user_block_count;
>  
>   total_count = le64_to_cpu(sbi->raw_super->block_count);
>   user_block_count = sbi->user_block_count;
> @@ -953,16 +954,16 @@ static int f2fs_statfs(struct dentry *dentry, struct 
> kstatfs *buf)
>   ovp_count = SM_I(sbi)->ovp_segments << sbi->log_blocks_per_seg;
>   buf->f_type = F2FS_SUPER_MAGIC;
>   buf->f_bsize = sbi->blocksize;
> + avail_user_block_count = user_block_count - sbi->reserved_blocks;
>  
>   buf->f_blocks = total_count - start_count;
>   buf->f_bfree = user_block_count - valid_user_blocks(sbi) + ovp_count;
> - buf->f_bavail = user_block_count - valid_user_blocks(sbi) -
> - sbi->reserved_blocks;
> + buf->f_bavail = avail_user_block_count - valid_user_blocks(sbi);
>  
>   avail_node_count = sbi->total_node_count - F2FS_RESERVED_NODE_NUM;
>  
> - if (avail_node_count > user_block_count) {
> - buf->f_files = user_block_count;
> + if (avail_node_count > avail_user_block_count) {

Likewise f_blocks calculation, the f_files one doesn't need to consider
reserved_blocks.

Thanks,

> + buf->f_files = avail_user_block_count;
>   buf->f_ffree = buf->f_bavail;
>   } else {
>   buf->f_files = avail_node_count;
> 


--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel