Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [f2fs-dev] [RFC PATCH v5] f2fs: support data compression | From | Chao Yu <> | Date | Wed, 15 Jan 2020 18:12:14 +0800 |
| |
On 2020/1/15 6:48, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 01/14, Chao Yu wrote: >> On 2020/1/14 0:11, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>> On 01/13, Chao Yu wrote: >>>> On 2020/1/12 2:02, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>> On 01/11, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>> On 2020/1/11 7:52, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>>>> On 01/06, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >>>>>>>> On 01/06, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 2020/1/3 14:50, Chao Yu wrote: >>>>>>>>>> This works to me. Could you run fsstress tests on compressed root directory? >>>>>>>>>> It seems still there are some bugs. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jaegeuk, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Did you mean running por_fsstress testcase? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Now, at least I didn't hit any problem for normal fsstress case. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yup. por_fsstress >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please check https://github.com/jaegeuk/f2fs/commits/g-dev-test. >>>>>>> I've fixed >>>>>>> - truncation offset >>>>>>> - i_compressed_blocks and its lock coverage >>>>>>> - error handling >>>>>>> - etc >>>>>> >>>>>> I changed as below, and por_fsstress stops panic the system. >>>>>> >>>>>> Could you merge all these fixes into original patch? >>>>> >>>>> Yup, let m roll up some early patches first once test results become good. >>>> >>>> I didn't encounter issue any more, how about por_fsstress test result in your >>>> enviornment? If there is, please share the call stack with me. >>> >>> Sure, will do, once I hit an issue. BTW, I'm hitting another unreacheable nat >>> entry issue during por_stress without compression. :( >> >> Did you enable any features during por_fsstress test? >> >> I only hit below warning during por_fsstress test on image w/o compression. >> >> ------------[ cut here ]------------ >> WARNING: CPU: 10 PID: 33483 at fs/fs-writeback.c:1448 __writeback_single_inode+0x28c/0x340 >> Call Trace: >> writeback_single_inode+0xad/0x120 >> sync_inode_metadata+0x3d/0x60 >> f2fs_sync_inode_meta+0x90/0xe0 [f2fs] >> block_operations+0x17c/0x360 [f2fs] >> f2fs_write_checkpoint+0x101/0xff0 [f2fs] >> f2fs_sync_fs+0xa8/0x130 [f2fs] >> f2fs_do_sync_file+0x19c/0x880 [f2fs] >> do_fsync+0x38/0x60 >> __x64_sys_fsync+0x10/0x20 >> do_syscall_64+0x5f/0x220 >> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 > > Does gc_mutex patch fix this?
No, gc_mutex patch fixes another problem.
BTW, it looks like a bug of VFS.
Thanks,
> >> >> Thanks, >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >From bb17d7d77fe0b8a3e3632a7026550800ab9609e9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>>>>> From: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com> >>>>>> Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2020 16:58:20 +0800 >>>>>> Subject: [PATCH] f2fs: compress: fix f2fs_put_rpages_mapping() >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> fs/f2fs/compress.c | 30 +++++++++++++++--------------- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/compress.c b/fs/f2fs/compress.c >>>>>> index 502cd0ddc2a7..5c6a31d84ce4 100644 >>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/compress.c >>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/compress.c >>>>>> @@ -74,18 +74,10 @@ static void f2fs_put_compressed_page(struct page *page) >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> static void f2fs_drop_rpages(struct compress_ctx *cc, >>>>>> - struct address_space *mapping, int len, bool unlock) >>>>>> + int len, bool unlock) >>>>>> { >>>>>> unsigned int i; >>>>>> for (i = 0; i < len; i++) { >>>>>> - if (mapping) { >>>>>> - pgoff_t start = start_idx_of_cluster(cc); >>>>>> - struct page *page = find_get_page(mapping, start + i); >>>>>> - >>>>>> - put_page(page); >>>>>> - put_page(page); >>>>>> - cc->rpages[i] = NULL; >>>>>> - } >>>>>> if (!cc->rpages[i]) >>>>>> continue; >>>>>> if (unlock) >>>>>> @@ -97,18 +89,25 @@ static void f2fs_drop_rpages(struct compress_ctx *cc, >>>>>> >>>>>> static void f2fs_put_rpages(struct compress_ctx *cc) >>>>>> { >>>>>> - f2fs_drop_rpages(cc, NULL, cc->cluster_size, false); >>>>>> + f2fs_drop_rpages(cc, cc->cluster_size, false); >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> static void f2fs_unlock_rpages(struct compress_ctx *cc, int len) >>>>>> { >>>>>> - f2fs_drop_rpages(cc, NULL, len, true); >>>>>> + f2fs_drop_rpages(cc, len, true); >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> static void f2fs_put_rpages_mapping(struct compress_ctx *cc, >>>>>> - struct address_space *mapping, int len) >>>>>> + struct address_space *mapping, >>>>>> + pgoff_t start, int len) >>>>>> { >>>>>> - f2fs_drop_rpages(cc, mapping, len, false); >>>>>> + int i; >>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < len; i++) { >>>>>> + struct page *page = find_get_page(mapping, start + i); >>>>>> + >>>>>> + put_page(page); >>>>>> + put_page(page); >>>>>> + } >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> static void f2fs_put_rpages_wbc(struct compress_ctx *cc, >>>>>> @@ -680,7 +679,8 @@ static int prepare_compress_overwrite(struct compress_ctx *cc, >>>>>> >>>>>> if (!PageUptodate(page)) { >>>>>> f2fs_unlock_rpages(cc, i + 1); >>>>>> - f2fs_put_rpages_mapping(cc, mapping, cc->cluster_size); >>>>>> + f2fs_put_rpages_mapping(cc, mapping, start_idx, >>>>>> + cc->cluster_size); >>>>>> f2fs_destroy_compress_ctx(cc); >>>>>> goto retry; >>>>>> } >>>>>> @@ -714,7 +714,7 @@ static int prepare_compress_overwrite(struct compress_ctx *cc, >>>>>> unlock_pages: >>>>>> f2fs_unlock_rpages(cc, i); >>>>>> release_pages: >>>>>> - f2fs_put_rpages_mapping(cc, mapping, i); >>>>>> + f2fs_put_rpages_mapping(cc, mapping, start_idx, i); >>>>>> f2fs_destroy_compress_ctx(cc); >>>>>> return ret; >>>>>> } >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 2.18.0.rc1 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One another fix in f2fs-tools as well. >>>>>>> https://github.com/jaegeuk/f2fs-tools >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>> . >>>>> >>> . >>> > . >
| |