Received: by 2002:ac0:a679:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id p54csp274320imp; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 23:27:44 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IayvBAzOSIChvzaEXnTiOv2JEeQXAPZu0MWyiQ+aiBUuPxHCEyRlsGOHpd3g/XQpph7RyHO X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:64:: with SMTP id 91mr36305187pla.229.1550647663999; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 23:27:43 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1550647663; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=CusVYS95zhJXTuCdjPtr5vtWnrYrUD85uOYjWlSHlKnsTi+JnvRHbZcYZO9SdBGCoH 9VbBc5+jMxNJ7mXLiu+LPO+rRG3i2VTGsmq+SjMGEc6i2qvsNbz3BxrGXiT97j/B0Bpb wHNcnN5tdTwKJpIlA9IkD7JzU5SThcJFDwT9lRdH6ht9viOLifOzT1JR6EQDvWzM5Bfr 135SfJ9D8viy4dopvL8O+xbcxoT+coSztngibQPgOobGkNRhe0MwezedWeuiCZymrytF p8FEiA8nFAhOb37Tomgl+jBBEPC8Dz7Bo3HNm8RY+T6+hjWn6LdI/3xLb20Kyi2IZY0X UcrQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=5Hd9l1CmZWTQVrhDqT56lWQaH7zWLZfBjateF2lImEU=; b=s5ugQSggQNqblz9kRHSazPqgZN6DU5q9gtRGftY94TPVF0r3BY5b1uA3Y/SrejJh5U +Paf5VkRghX7u1i+gAojt6xAk4dvw0rXxBvLkma8g0J8+exKmLnaU6R7oswnLXQeoMOB Uk7+LBXrD9ydt2X5B1cQN/7e2nqnOVZn1wmZlVN6UH0x1PFRORkLfG4TztX3QQmxFiXx IdSp55KrPuQpPCEYmjWKNkaqL0acsxovL4apI2StluXlyGGXj6EDz4TDhJlepsq7gnF4 Vp8I/uDy9ZqTHQ1itmXEdKXwWsWkqTvY8ZZMtMssALiy/RJwOL3fLvk2YZY580Ctp+tH Qivg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id d35si19235996pla.48.2019.02.19.23.27.26; Tue, 19 Feb 2019 23:27:43 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727572AbfBTHZN (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 20 Feb 2019 02:25:13 -0500 Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.191]:4230 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726315AbfBTHZN (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2019 02:25:13 -0500 Received: from DGGEMS403-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 60A696DEA17154714B94; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 15:25:11 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.134.22.195) by DGGEMS403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.408.0; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 15:25:08 +0800 Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: don't clear CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG To: Jaegeuk Kim CC: , References: <20190212023343.52215-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org> <20190216045530.GA57019@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> <29a4fd24-6340-41df-7199-6e89b70c6341@huawei.com> <20190220070855.GA91331@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 15:25:08 +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: <20190220070855.GA91331@jaegeuk-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.134.22.195] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019/2/20 15:08, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > On 02/18, Chao Yu wrote: >> 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 >>>>> --- >>>>> 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); > > What does this mean? I'm in doubt we have a missing case where we clear this Cpu pipeline / compiler can make code out-of-order execution, which means: a = 1; b = 2; may actually be executed as the order of: b = 2; a = 1; So I doubt that below two line codes can be executed out-of-order: else __clear_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG); --- clear flag later if () __set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG); --- set flag first > flag, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG. Agreed, I've checked each operation in f2fs_quota_operations yesterday, and didn't find any missing places yet... Thanks, > >> >> Thanks, >> >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>>> >>>>> if (is_sbi_flag_set(sbi, SBI_QUOTA_NEED_REPAIR)) >>>>> __set_ckpt_flags(ckpt, CP_QUOTA_NEED_FSCK_FLAG); >>>>> >>> >>> . >>> > > . >