Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: don't clear CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG
To:     Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
CC:     <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
References: <20190212023343.52215-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org>
 <df77f830-e5dd-5943-d5b0-e21ced3a7df2@huawei.com>
 <20190216045530.GA57019@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com>
From:   Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <29a4fd24-6340-41df-7199-6e89b70c6341@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 18 Feb 2019 17:10:25 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20190216045530.GA57019@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 2019/2/16 12:55, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> On 02/13, Chao Yu wrote:
>> On 2019/2/12 10:33, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>>> If we met this once, let fsck.f2fs clear this only.
>>> Note that, this addresses all the subtle fault injection test.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
>>> ---
>>>  fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c | 2 --
>>>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c
>>> index 03fea4efd64b..10a3ada28715 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/checkpoint.c
>>> @@ -1267,8 +1267,6 @@ static void update_ckpt_flags(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct cp_control *cpc)
>>>  
>>>  	if (is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_QUOTA_SKIP_FLUSH))
>>>  		__set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG);
>>> -	else
>>> -		__clear_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG);
>>
>> I didn't get it, previously, if we didn't persist all quota file's data in
>> checkpoint, then we will tag CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG in CP area, but in current
>> checkpoint, we have persisted all quota file's data, quota files are consistent
>> with all other files in filesystem, why we can't remove this NEED_FSCK flag..?
> 
> I said it's subtle. So, I guessed 1) set CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG, 2) clear

I know it's subtle... and I agreed we can fix it like this in upstream
first, but in our product, it's not rare that we hit the
QUOTA_SKIP_FLUSH(its value is 4) case, later we may encounter long latency
caused by quota repairing of fsck.

> SBI_QUOTA_SKIP_FLUSH by checkpoint, 3) clear CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG by another
> checkpoint?

But later if QUOTA_NEED_REPAIR is set, we will set QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG
again, right?

if (is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_QUOTA_NEED_REPAIR))
	__set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG);


So in order to figure out whether this is caused by out-of-order execution
of below assignments:

	if (is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_QUOTA_SKIP_FLUSH))
		__set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG);
	else
		__clear_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG); --- clear flag later

	if (is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_QUOTA_NEED_REPAIR))
		__set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG); --- set flag first


Could you have a try:

	if (is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_QUOTA_NEED_REPAIR) ||
			is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_QUOTA_SKIP_FLUSH))
		__set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG);
	else
		__clear_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG);

Thanks,

> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>>  
>>>  	if (is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_QUOTA_NEED_REPAIR))
>>>  		__set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG);
>>>
> 
> .
>