Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Thu, 5 May 2016 10:00:15 +0800 | From | Hou Pengyang <> | Subject | Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 11/11] f2fs: retry to truncate blocks in -ENOMEM case |
| |
On 2016/5/4 2:21, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > This patch modifies to retry truncating node blocks in -ENOMEM case. > Hi, Kim. in this patch, I think there is NO chance to retry for -ENOMEM.
This is because if exist_written_data returns false, we can confirm that this inode has been released from orphan radix-tree: f2fs_evict_inode ---> remove_inode_page ---> truncate_node ---> remove_orphan_inode On this condition, err is 0, So it won't enter: if (err && err != -ENOENT) { ... } sequentially, there is no chance to truncate node blocks again. I miss something else?
How about this patch?
--- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c @@ -345,6 +345,7 @@ void f2fs_evict_inode(struct inode *inode) set_inode_flag(fi, FI_NO_ALLOC); i_size_write(inode, 0);
+retry: if (F2FS_HAS_BLOCKS(inode)) err = f2fs_truncate(inode, true);
@@ -354,6 +355,11 @@ void f2fs_evict_inode(struct inode *inode) f2fs_unlock_op(sbi); }
+ if (err == -ENOMEM) { + err = 0; + goto retry; + } + sb_end_intwrite(inode->i_sb); no_delete: stat_dec_inline_xattr(inode); > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> > --- > fs/f2fs/inode.c | 7 ++++++- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/inode.c b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > index f4ac851..5cccd7a 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/inode.c > +++ b/fs/f2fs/inode.c > @@ -344,7 +344,7 @@ void f2fs_evict_inode(struct inode *inode) > sb_start_intwrite(inode->i_sb); > set_inode_flag(fi, FI_NO_ALLOC); > i_size_write(inode, 0); > - > +retry: > if (F2FS_HAS_BLOCKS(inode)) > err = f2fs_truncate(inode, true); > > @@ -374,6 +374,11 @@ no_delete: > > if (err && err != -ENOENT) { > if (!exist_written_data(sbi, inode->i_ino, ORPHAN_INO)) { > + /* give more chances, if ENOMEM case */ > + if (err == -ENOMEM) { > + err = 0; > + goto retry; > + } > /* > * get here because we failed to release resource > * of inode previously, reminder our user to run fsck >
| |