Agree.
On 2017/11/10 1:59, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
On 11/08, Yunlong Song wrote:
So we should use f2fs_bug_on(sbi, !total_freed && !sync && gc_type ==
FG_GC);
f2fs_bug_on(sbi, !total_freed && has_not_enough_free_secs(sbi, 0, 0)); ?
On 2017/11/7 14:56, Chao Yu wrote:
On 2017/11/7 12:01, Yunlong S
On 11/08, Yunlong Song wrote:
> So we should use f2fs_bug_on(sbi, !total_freed && !sync && gc_type ==
> FG_GC);
f2fs_bug_on(sbi, !total_freed && has_not_enough_free_secs(sbi, 0, 0)); ?
>
> On 2017/11/7 14:56, Chao Yu wrote:
> > On 2017/11/7 12:01, Yunlong Song wrote:
> > > Sorry, misunderstandin
So we should use f2fs_bug_on(sbi, !total_freed && !sync && gc_type ==
FG_GC);
On 2017/11/7 14:56, Chao Yu wrote:
On 2017/11/7 12:01, Yunlong Song wrote:
Sorry, misunderstanding, because I think when sync == true, FG_GC does not
check has_not_enough_free_secs, so maybe it does not have to do an
On 2017/11/7 12:01, Yunlong Song wrote:
> Sorry, misunderstanding, because I think when sync == true, FG_GC does not
> check has_not_enough_free_secs, so maybe it does not have to do any gc
> at all.
> For example, if there are 100 segments for f2fs, and 20 segments are full or
> valid blocks over
Sorry, misunderstanding, because I think when sync == true, FG_GC does not
check has_not_enough_free_secs, so maybe it does not have to do any gc
at all.
For example, if there are 100 segments for f2fs, and 20 segments are full or
valid blocks over fggc_threshold, then it is correct to fail in g
On 11/07, Yunlong Song wrote:
> Because I find that some out-of-free problem is caused by the failure
> of get victim target. For example, chao has pointed out that he has
> found out a bug when adding this bug_on last week.
That's NOT what I asked. Why not checking FG_GC all the time like this?
Because I find that some out-of-free problem is caused by the failure
of get victim target. For example, chao has pointed out that he has
found out a bug when adding this bug_on last week.
On 2017/11/7 10:40, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
On 11/06, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
On 11/06, Yunlong Song wrote:
Agree.
On 11/06, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 11/06, Yunlong Song wrote:
> > Agree.
> >
> > On 2017/11/3 11:44, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > > On 10/13, Yunlong Song wrote:
> > > > This can help us to debug on some corner case.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song
> > > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu
> > > > --
On 11/06, Yunlong Song wrote:
> Agree.
>
> On 2017/11/3 11:44, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > On 10/13, Yunlong Song wrote:
> > > This can help us to debug on some corner case.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song
> > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu
> > > ---
> > > fs/f2fs/gc.c | 6 +-
> > > 1 file
Agree.
On 2017/11/3 11:44, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
On 10/13, Yunlong Song wrote:
This can help us to debug on some corner case.
Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song
Signed-off-by: Chao Yu
---
fs/f2fs/gc.c | 6 +-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc
OK to me.
>
>
>> On 10/13, Yunlong Song wrote:
>> This can help us to debug on some corner case.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song
>> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu
>> ---
>> fs/f2fs/gc.c | 6 +-
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>> i
ping...
On 2017/10/13 21:31, Yunlong Song wrote:
This can help us to debug on some corner case.
Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song
Signed-off-by: Chao Yu
---
fs/f2fs/gc.c | 6 +-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
index 197ebf4..2b03202 10
On 10/13, Yunlong Song wrote:
> This can help us to debug on some corner case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song
> Signed-off-by: Chao Yu
> ---
> fs/f2fs/gc.c | 6 +-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
> index 197ebf4..2b03202 100644
13 matches
Mail list logo
