[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACOAw_yovM592K3-2fQzA6M29XqWu8s_2f+zXawKo-QpNSXq0w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 13:33:11 -0700
From: Daeho Jeong <daeho43@...il.com>
To: Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, kernel-team@...roid.com,
Daeho Jeong <daehojeong@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v4] f2fs: introduce fragment allocation mode
mount option
> if (f2fs_need_seq_seg(sbi))
> return 0;
>
> static inline bool f2fs_need_seq_seg(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi)
> {
> return F2FS_OPTION(sbi).fs_mode == FS_MODE_FRAGMENT_FIXED_BLK;
> }
>
Do you need this in select_policy(), either?
Like,
if (f2fs_need_rand_seg(sbi))
p->offset = prandom_u32() % (MAIN_SECS(sbi) *
sbi->segs_per_sec);
else if (f2fs_need_seq_seg(sbi))
p->offset = 0;
> One more concern... we'd better to save fragment_remained_hole as well
> as fragment_remained_chunk, otherwise, if fragment_chunk_size +
> fragment_hole_size > 512, fragment hole will be truncated to 512 -
> fragment_chunk_size due to we won't create hole with enough size as
> seg->next_blkoff has crossed end of current segment.
>
Sorry, I don't get it. You mean making fragment_remained_hole as a
global variable?
Maybe, we run into the same race condition issue you told before for
fragment_remained_chunk.
Could you clarify this more?
Thanks,
Powered by blists - more mailing lists