Received: by 2002:a25:c205:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id s5csp431415ybf; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:36:20 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzSR/d41hwZRXA1jH6pbzpr7YzT1RJ/XMF/qzdZKsgQ6qifhMx+qnvyJFxx0umIcI9JSZ2p X-Received: by 2002:aca:c3d5:: with SMTP id t204mr2403905oif.80.1582878980326; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:36:20 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1582878980; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=ty+iCs135Ctnp749yC1AGHauxsrksnCHq1GpBz/RchSECIO53VUgCKoEqKm7zPfFAb NlM9Xd5evQwE/keCN9XET2eiC3SjEeggDWEP3i4jIaRfljPYX8S87ojzSB/hO1UXZh3+ inHkhwyioHVhRbPv4GKMNGuU4o5ojTmgMHWNxf6aDas/8RiwJR2N1RcIOPGOiZTL4abv 3xve6LtCvXGvPssTURkXSU0uGhCpg91fyO+Cjas57u/1ichFAOx+iJCDN3yEBIA4fW0o vybv4hp7bS4zF6j2g+A9Z65aJe1DS9iu9+vKbBGY7pZeE3BH42UPf/uFwnAEGTjhrV0r wJgA== 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=CerBuEh2QmOvhvb5krEgVe52O8ftPo/p0zzj+fVnwxI=; b=NweFENhH8X3cDnpB1CbzAJ63KnzhUGQOihJX6lPaMHwKEg8uFJyQ6NjWqZlVBc9HMd 3mBhrplozm1TlWUq08PPs6qzIq0E7/DwNQn1Tm8PthJZhNAxKTiUNlzZcAlp22m3EYhS Wq/gczo3pGPgCLj7/x33oV24wYTT4L5ddg58rG1TA8nCzff7PPe3vcdcc3JMm/4AzZFN RYcyjM8RqVOBfoXMjqOrdlBh+23EM10mIiRZN88xrZbOjKnCqC6I0PcLuVmm08MRMt1j bmYjMz/Kv8kulZ75bXf5qvn8tv3gv4eu2BxO7fJAH943pCg+ulqwHVUm/NJtEEW56qIf vshQ== 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 12si1445513oir.69.2020.02.28.00.36.08; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 00:36:20 -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 S1726752AbgB1Ifp (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 28 Feb 2020 03:35:45 -0500 Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.190]:11120 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726063AbgB1Ifp (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Feb 2020 03:35:45 -0500 Received: from DGGEMS407-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 2A02FE226D94DD5082DD; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 16:35:43 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.134.22.195] (10.134.22.195) by smtp.huawei.com (10.3.19.207) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Fri, 28 Feb 2020 16:35:38 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] f2fs: Fix mount failure due to SPO after a successful online resize FS To: Sahitya Tummala , Jaegeuk Kim , CC: References: <1582799978-22277-1-git-send-email-stummala@codeaurora.org> From: Chao Yu Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 16:35:37 +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: <1582799978-22277-1-git-send-email-stummala@codeaurora.org> 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 Hi Sahitya, Good catch. On 2020/2/27 18:39, Sahitya Tummala wrote: > Even though online resize is successfully done, a SPO immediately > after resize, still causes below error in the next mount. > > [ 11.294650] F2FS-fs (sda8): Wrong user_block_count: 2233856 > [ 11.300272] F2FS-fs (sda8): Failed to get valid F2FS checkpoint > > This is because after FS metadata is updated in update_fs_metadata() > if the SBI_IS_DIRTY is not dirty, then CP will not be done to reflect > the new user_block_count. > > Signed-off-by: Sahitya Tummala > --- > fs/f2fs/gc.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c > index a92fa49..a14a75f 100644 > --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c > +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c > @@ -1577,6 +1577,7 @@ int f2fs_resize_fs(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, __u64 block_count) > > update_fs_metadata(sbi, -secs); > clear_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_IS_RESIZEFS); Need a barrier here to keep order in between above code and set_sbi_flag(DIRTY)? > + set_sbi_flag(sbi, SBI_IS_DIRTY); > err = f2fs_sync_fs(sbi->sb, 1); > if (err) { > update_fs_metadata(sbi, secs); Do we need to add clear_sbi_flag(, SBI_IS_DIRTY) into update_fs_metadata(), so above path can be covered as well? Thanks, >