linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: fix the case when there is no free segment to allocate for CURSEG_WARM

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 23 Feb 2017 20:06:21 +0800
From:   Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
To:     Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
        Yunlong Song <yunlong.song@...wei.com>
CC:     <cm224.lee@...sung.com>, <chao@...nel.org>, <sylinux@....com>,
        <miaoxie@...wei.com>, <zhouxiyu@...wei.com>,
        <bintian.wang@...wei.com>, <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] f2fs: fix the case when there is no free segment to
 allocate for CURSEG_WARM_NODE

On 2017/2/18 2:39, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> Hi Yunlong,
> 
> I already started to test this since a couple of days ago. :)
> 
> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/jaegeuk/f2fs.git/commit/?h=dev-test&id=908b5f463c82eaf972b149a26bb310f5e25064fd

Hi, Jaegeuk,

Could you send this patch into mailing list? Anyway I will comment in this patch
first. :)

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> On 02/17, Yunlong Song wrote:
>> If the free segments are used up, then new_curseg will fail for
>> CURSEG_WARM_NODE, in this case, we should use change_curseg instead of
>> new_curseg.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song <yunlong.song@...wei.com>
>> ---
>>  fs/f2fs/segment.c | 2 --
>>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
>> index df2ff5c..32820cd 100644
>> --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
>> @@ -1564,8 +1564,6 @@ static void allocate_segment_by_default(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
>>  
>>  	if (force)
>>  		new_curseg(sbi, type, true);
>> -	else if (type == CURSEG_WARM_NODE)

Would it be better to check CP_CRC_RECOVERY_FLAG for compatibility of old image?

else if (!is_set_ckpt_flags(CP_CRC_RECOVERY_FLAG) && type == CURSEG_WARM_NODE)
	new_curseg(sbi, type, false);

Thanks,

>> -		new_curseg(sbi, type, false);
>>  	else if (curseg->alloc_type == LFS && is_next_segment_free(sbi, type))
>>  		new_curseg(sbi, type, false);
>>  	else if (need_SSR(sbi) && get_ssr_segment(sbi, type))
>> -- 
>> 1.8.5.2
> 
> .
>