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;
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 924966021A
Date:   Tue, 30 Jul 2019 10:06:30 +0530
From:   Sahitya Tummala <stummala@codeaurora.org>
To:     Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
Cc:     Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>, Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>,
        linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stummala@codeaurora.org
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: Fix indefinite loop in f2fs_gc()
Message-ID: <20190730043630.GG8289@codeaurora.org>
References: <1564377626-12898-1-git-send-email-stummala@codeaurora.org>
 <a5acb5cb-2e77-902f-0a5e-063f7cbd0643@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <a5acb5cb-2e77-902f-0a5e-063f7cbd0643@kernel.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Chao,

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 12:00:45AM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> Hi Sahitya,
> 
> On 2019-7-29 13:20, Sahitya Tummala wrote:
> > Policy - foreground GC, LFS mode and greedy GC mode.
> > 
> > Under this policy, f2fs_gc() loops forever to GC as it doesn't have
> > enough free segements to proceed and thus it keeps calling gc_more
> > for the same victim segment.  This can happen if the selected victim
> > segment could not be GC'd due to failed blkaddr validity check i.e.
> > is_alive() returns false for the blocks set in current validity map.
> > 
> > Fix this by not resetting the sbi->cur_victim_sec to NULL_SEGNO, when
> > the segment selected could not be GC'd. This helps to select another
> > segment for GC and thus helps to proceed forward with GC.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Sahitya Tummala <stummala@codeaurora.org>
> > ---
> >  fs/f2fs/gc.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
> > index 8974672..7bbcc4a 100644
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
> > @@ -1303,7 +1303,7 @@ int f2fs_gc(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, bool sync,
> >  		round++;
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	if (gc_type == FG_GC)
> > +	if (gc_type == FG_GC && seg_freed)
> >  		sbi->cur_victim_sec = NULL_SEGNO;
> 
> In some cases, we may remain last victim in sbi->cur_victim_sec, and jump out of
> GC cycle, then SSR can skip the last victim due to sec_usage_check()...
> 

I see. I have a few questions on how to fix this issue. Please share your
comments.

1. Do you think the scenario described is valid? It happens rarely, not very
easy to reproduce.  From the dumps, I see that only block is set as valid in
the sentry->cur_valid_map for which I see that summary block check is_alive()
could return false. As only one block is set as valid, chances are there it
can be always selected as the victim by get_victim_by_default() under FG_GC.

2. What are the possible scenarios where summary block check is_alive() could
fail for a segment?

3. How does GC handle such segments?

Thanks,

> Thanks,
> 
> >  
> >  	if (sync)
> > 

-- 
--
Sent by a consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.