On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 02:10:50PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > Hi Jaegeuk, > > On 2016/5/30 10:37, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > Hi Chao, > > > > On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 01:19:11PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: > >> From: Chao Yu <yuch...@huawei.com> > >> > >> If we fail to move data page during foreground GC, we should give another > >> chance to writeback that page which was set dirty previously by writer. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuch...@huawei.com> > >> --- > >> fs/f2fs/gc.c | 5 ++++- > >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c > >> index 38d56f6..ee213a8 100644 > >> --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c > >> +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c > >> @@ -653,12 +653,15 @@ static void move_data_page(struct inode *inode, > >> block_t bidx, int gc_type) > >> .page = page, > >> .encrypted_page = NULL, > >> }; > >> + bool is_dirty = PageDirty(page); > >> + > >> set_page_dirty(page); > >> f2fs_wait_on_page_writeback(page, DATA, true); > >> if (clear_page_dirty_for_io(page)) > >> inode_dec_dirty_pages(inode); > >> set_cold_data(page); > >> - do_write_data_page(&fio); > >> + if (do_write_data_page(&fio) && is_dirty) > >> + set_page_dirty(page); > > > > If this page is truncated with -ENOENT, we don't need to set it dirty again. > > Agree > > > I expect that, if we get an error here, do_garbage_collect() would retry > > FG_GC > > IIRC, you have reworked the FG_GC flows changed from an infinite loop to > trying > do the movement just one time. Here, I think if there are just few of blocks > are > failed to be moved, we can give one more time for retrying. How do you think?
Mostly I expected here -ENOENT caused by race condition. Do we have another expectation? Thanks, > > > again. > > > > Thanks, > > > >> clear_cold_data(page); > >> } > >> out: > >> -- > >> 2.7.2 > > . > >
