On 2018/7/7 5:09, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> Let's flush journal nat entries for speed up in the next run.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/f2fs/node.c | 7 +++++++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/node.c b/fs/f2fs/node.c
> index 29237aeca041..0f076fb0d828 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/node.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/node.c
> @@ -2613,6 +2613,13 @@ void f2fs_flush_nat_entries(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> struct cp_control *cpc)
> nid_t set_idx = 0;
> LIST_HEAD(sets);
>
> + /* during unmount, let's flush nat_bits before checking dirty_nat_cnt */
> + if (enabled_nat_bits(sbi, cpc)) {
> + down_write(&nm_i->nat_tree_lock);
> + remove_nats_in_journal(sbi);
> + up_write(&nm_i->nat_tree_lock);
> + }
The case will cover that nm_i->dirty_nat_cnt is zero and there is cached nats in
journal?
So enabled_nat_bits() below should be removed?
if (enabled_nat_bits(sbi, cpc) ||
!__has_cursum_space(journal, nm_i->dirty_nat_cnt, NAT_JOURNAL))
remove_nats_in_journal(sbi);
Thanks,
> +
> if (!nm_i->dirty_nat_cnt)
> return;
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
