On 2017/11/14 15:20, LiFan wrote:
> In flush_nat_entries, all dirty nats will be flushed and if their new address
> isn't NULL_ADDR, their bitmaps will be updated, the free_nid_count of the
> bitmaps will be increased regardless of whether the nats have already been
> occupied before. This could lead to wrong free_nid_count.
> So this patch checks the status of the bits before actually set/clear them.
> 
> Fixes: 586d1492f301 ("f2fs: skip scanning free nid bitmap of full NAT blocks")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Fan li <fanofcode...@samsung.com>

Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <yuch...@huawei.com>

Thanks,

> ---
>  fs/f2fs/node.c | 17 ++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/node.c b/fs/f2fs/node.c index d234c6e..b965a53 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/node.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/node.c
> @@ -1906,15 +1906,18 @@ static void update_free_nid_bitmap(struct 
> f2fs_sb_info *sbi, nid_t nid,
>       if (!test_bit_le(nat_ofs, nm_i->nat_block_bitmap))
>               return;
>  
> -     if (set)
> +     if (set) {
> +             if (test_bit_le(nid_ofs, nm_i->free_nid_bitmap[nat_ofs]))
> +                     return;
>               __set_bit_le(nid_ofs, nm_i->free_nid_bitmap[nat_ofs]);
> -     else
> -             __clear_bit_le(nid_ofs, nm_i->free_nid_bitmap[nat_ofs]);
> -
> -     if (set)
>               nm_i->free_nid_count[nat_ofs]++;
> -     else if (!build)
> -             nm_i->free_nid_count[nat_ofs]--;
> +     } else {
> +             if (!test_bit_le(nid_ofs, nm_i->free_nid_bitmap[nat_ofs]))
> +                     return;
> +             __clear_bit_le(nid_ofs, nm_i->free_nid_bitmap[nat_ofs]);
> +             if (!build)
> +                     nm_i->free_nid_count[nat_ofs]--;
> +     }
>  }
>  
>  static void scan_nat_page(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> --
> 2.7.4
> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to