linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] f2fs: fix heap mode to reset it back

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 linux-cve-announce 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]

Message-ID: <eeff0d39-b51e-a992-864a-b2e00c5c7135@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 29 Jan 2018 17:01:04 +0800
From:   Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>
To:     Yunlong Song <yunlong.song@...wei.com>, <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
        <chao@...nel.org>, <yunlong.song@...oud.com>
CC:     <miaoxie@...wei.com>, <bintian.wang@...wei.com>,
        <shengyong1@...wei.com>, <heyunlei@...wei.com>,
        <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] f2fs: fix heap mode to reset it back

On 2018/1/29 16:31, Yunlong Song wrote:
> The old commit allocates hot data & nodes in the beginning of partition 
> both for heap and
> noheap mode. But from the commit message, the heap mode should be like 
> before, i.e.,
> allocate hot data & nodes from curseg to left.

Let's ping Jaegeuk to check that, :)

Thanks,

> 
> On 2018/1/29 16:12, Chao Yu wrote:
>> Hi Yunlong,
>>
>> On 2018/1/29 11:37, Yunlong Song wrote:
>>> Commit 7a20b8a61eff81bdb7097a578752a74860e9d142 ("f2fs: allocate node
>>> and hot data in the beginning of partition") introduces another mount
>>> option, heap, to reset it back. But it does not do anything for heap
>>> mode, so fix it.
>> I think Jaegeuk did three things in that patch:
>> a) add missing heap mount option handling in ->show_options.
>> b) set noheap by default.
>> c) change allocation policy to the one that allocate hotdata & nodes in the
>> front of main are intensively.
>>
>> They could be separated, independent, and I don't see such intention that
>> we can only use c) the new introduced allocation policy in noheap mode.
>>
>> Anyway, I think Jaegeuk can help to double check that.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yunlong Song <yunlong.song@...wei.com>
>>> ---
>>>   fs/f2fs/gc.c      | 5 +++--
>>>   fs/f2fs/segment.c | 3 ++-
>>>   2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/gc.c b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>> index aa720cc..b9d93fd 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/gc.c
>>> @@ -191,8 +191,9 @@ static void select_policy(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, int gc_type,
>>>   	if (gc_type != FG_GC && p->max_search > sbi->max_victim_search)
>>>   		p->max_search = sbi->max_victim_search;
>>>   
>>> -	/* let's select beginning hot/small space first */
>>> -	if (type == CURSEG_HOT_DATA || IS_NODESEG(type))
>>> +	/* let's select beginning hot/small space first in no_heap mode*/
>>> +	if (test_opt(sbi, NOHEAP) &&
>>> +		(type == CURSEG_HOT_DATA || IS_NODESEG(type)))
>>>   		p->offset = 0;
>>>   	else
>>>   		p->offset = SIT_I(sbi)->last_victim[p->gc_mode];
>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
>>> index e5739ce..77a48c4 100644
>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
>>> @@ -2167,7 +2167,8 @@ static unsigned int __get_next_segno(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, int type)
>>>   	if (sbi->segs_per_sec != 1)
>>>   		return CURSEG_I(sbi, type)->segno;
>>>   
>>> -	if (type == CURSEG_HOT_DATA || IS_NODESEG(type))
>>> +	if (test_opt(sbi, NOHEAP) &&
>>> +		(type == CURSEG_HOT_DATA || IS_NODESEG(type)))
>>>   		return 0;
>>>   
>>>   	if (SIT_I(sbi)->last_victim[ALLOC_NEXT])
>>>
>>
>> .
>>
>