On Aug 27, 2019 / 09:34, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2019/8/21 12:47, Shin'ichiro Kawasaki wrote:
> > To prepare for write pointer consistency check by fsck, add
> > f2fs_report_zones() helper function which calls REPORT ZONE command to
> > get write pointer status. The function is added to lib/libf2fs_zoned
> > which gathers zoned block device related functions.
> >
> > To check write pointer consistency with f2fs meta data, fsck needs to
> > refer both of reported zone information and f2fs super block structure
> > "f2fs_sb_info". However, libf2fs_zoned does not import f2fs_sb_info. To
> > keep f2fs_sb_info structure out of libf2fs_zoned, provide a callback
> > function in fsck to f2fs_report_zones() and call it for each zone.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shin'ichiro Kawasaki <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > include/f2fs_fs.h | 2 ++
> > lib/libf2fs_zoned.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 59 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/f2fs_fs.h b/include/f2fs_fs.h
> > index 0d9a036..abadd1b 100644
> > --- a/include/f2fs_fs.h
> > +++ b/include/f2fs_fs.h
> > @@ -1279,6 +1279,8 @@ blk_zone_cond_str(struct blk_zone *blkz)
> >
> > extern int f2fs_get_zoned_model(int);
> > extern int f2fs_get_zone_blocks(int);
> > +typedef int (report_zones_cb_t)(int i, struct blk_zone *blkz, void
> > *opaque);
> > +extern int f2fs_report_zones(int, report_zones_cb_t *, void *);
> > extern int f2fs_check_zones(int);
> > extern int f2fs_reset_zones(int);
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/libf2fs_zoned.c b/lib/libf2fs_zoned.c
> > index af00b44..fc4974f 100644
> > --- a/lib/libf2fs_zoned.c
> > +++ b/lib/libf2fs_zoned.c
> > @@ -193,6 +193,57 @@ int f2fs_get_zone_blocks(int i)
> >
> > #define F2FS_REPORT_ZONES_BUFSZ 524288
> >
> > +int f2fs_report_zones(int j, report_zones_cb_t *report_zones_cb, void
> > *opaque)
> > +{
> > + struct device_info *dev = c.devices + j;
> > + struct blk_zone_report *rep;
> > + struct blk_zone *blkz;
> > + unsigned int i, n = 0;
> > + u_int64_t total_sectors = (dev->total_sectors * c.sector_size) >> 9;
>
> Hi Shin'ichiro,
Hi Chao, thank you for your review.
> Could we use SECTOR_SHIFT instead?
Yes. In the third patch, I added SECTOR_SHIFT definition in fsck/fsck.c. To use
it both in lib/libf2fs_zoned.c and fsck/fsck.c, I will define SECTOR_SHIFT in
include/f2fs_fs.h.
>
> > + u_int64_t sector = 0;
> > + int ret = -1;
> > +
> > + rep = malloc(F2FS_REPORT_ZONES_BUFSZ);
> > + if (!rep) {
> > + ERR_MSG("No memory for report zones\n");
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > + }
> > +
> > + while (sector < total_sectors) {
> > +
> > + /* Get zone info */
> > + rep->sector = sector;
> > + rep->nr_zones = (F2FS_REPORT_ZONES_BUFSZ - sizeof(struct
> > blk_zone_report))
> > + / sizeof(struct blk_zone);
> > +
> > + ret = ioctl(dev->fd, BLKREPORTZONE, rep);
> > + if (ret != 0) {
> > + ret = -errno;
> > + ERR_MSG("ioctl BLKREPORTZONE failed\n");
> It's minor, it will be better to print errno here, since I didn't see we print
> error no from caller.
Thanks. Will do that.
>
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (!rep->nr_zones) {
> > + ret = -EIO;
> > + ERR_MSG("Unexpected ioctl BLKREPORTZONE result\n");
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + blkz = (struct blk_zone *)(rep + 1);
> > + for (i = 0; i < rep->nr_zones && sector < total_sectors; i++) {
>
> The condition looks like that block zones in rep may across end-of-device?
> Will
> this really happen?
>
> So I mean will "i < rep->nr_zones" be enough?
You are correct. I will remove the sector comparison in v2 series.
--
Best Regards,
Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
