On 2021/7/12 14:53, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Sat 10-07-21 16:11:38, Chao Yu wrote:
On 2021/7/7 17:57, Mel Gorman wrote:
I think it would work but it would be preferable to find out why the
tail page has an order set in the first place. I've looked over
Agreed.
mm/page_alloc.c and mm/compactio
On Sat 10-07-21 16:11:38, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2021/7/7 17:57, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > I think it would work but it would be preferable to find out why the
> > tail page has an order set in the first place. I've looked over
>
> Agreed.
>
> > mm/page_alloc.c and mm/compaction.c a few times and did no
On 2021/7/7 17:57, Mel Gorman wrote:
I think it would work but it would be preferable to find out why the
tail page has an order set in the first place. I've looked over
Agreed.
mm/page_alloc.c and mm/compaction.c a few times and did not spot where
set_private_page(page, 0) is missed when it
On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 08:48:28AM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2021/7/6 17:12, Mel Gorman wrote:
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index d6e94cc8066c..be87c4be481f 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -3515,8 +3515,13 @@ void split_page(struct page *page, unsi
On 2021/7/6 17:12, Mel Gorman wrote:
On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 07:45:26PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
I'm not really familiar with the compaction code. Mel, I see a call
to post_alloc_hook() in split_map_pages(). Are there other ways of
getting the compaction code to allocate a page which don't
On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 07:45:26PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 11:04:21AM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 07/05, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > I think freshly allocated pages have a page->private of 0. ie this
> > > code in mm/page_alloc.c:
> > >
> > > pa
On 2021/7/6 2:06, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
On 07/06, Chao Yu wrote:
On 2021/7/5 19:47, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 07:33:35PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
On 2021/7/5 16:56, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
On 07/05, Chao Yu wrote:
On 2021/7/5 13:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
We need to guarantee it's init
On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 11:04:21AM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 07/05, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > I think freshly allocated pages have a page->private of 0. ie this
> > code in mm/page_alloc.c:
> >
> > page = rmqueue(ac->preferred_zoneref->zone, zone, order,
> >
On 07/06, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2021/7/5 19:47, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 07:33:35PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > On 2021/7/5 16:56, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > On 07/05, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > > > On 2021/7/5 13:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > > > We need to guarantee it's initial
On 07/05, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 07:33:35PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> > On 2021/7/5 16:56, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > On 07/05, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > > On 2021/7/5 13:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > > We need to guarantee it's initially zero. Otherwise, it'll hurt
> > > > > enti
On 2021/7/5 19:47, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 07:33:35PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
On 2021/7/5 16:56, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
On 07/05, Chao Yu wrote:
On 2021/7/5 13:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
We need to guarantee it's initially zero. Otherwise, it'll hurt entire flag
operations.
Oops
On Mon, Jul 05, 2021 at 07:33:35PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2021/7/5 16:56, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 07/05, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > On 2021/7/5 13:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > > We need to guarantee it's initially zero. Otherwise, it'll hurt entire
> > > > flag
> > > > operations.
> > >
> > > Oop
On 2021/7/5 16:56, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
On 07/05, Chao Yu wrote:
On 2021/7/5 13:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
We need to guarantee it's initially zero. Otherwise, it'll hurt entire flag
operations.
Oops, I didn't get the point, shouldn't .private be zero after page was
just allocated by filesystem? Wh
On 07/05, Chao Yu wrote:
> On 2021/7/5 13:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > We need to guarantee it's initially zero. Otherwise, it'll hurt entire flag
> > operations.
>
> Oops, I didn't get the point, shouldn't .private be zero after page was
> just allocated by filesystem? What's the case we will encou
On 2021/7/5 13:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
We need to guarantee it's initially zero. Otherwise, it'll hurt entire flag
operations.
Oops, I didn't get the point, shouldn't .private be zero after page was
just allocated by filesystem? What's the case we will encounter stall
private data left in page?
We need to guarantee it's initially zero. Otherwise, it'll hurt entire flag
operations.
Fixes: b763f3bedc2d ("f2fs: restructure f2fs page.private layout")
Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim
---
fs/f2fs/data.c | 2 ++
fs/f2fs/f2fs.h | 5 -
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a
16 matches
Mail list logo
