| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2022 17:34:19 +0800
From: Yuwei Guan <Yuwei.Guan@...krlife.com>
To: <jaegeuk@...nel.org>, <chao@...nel.org>
CC: <linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Yuwei Guan <Yuwei.Guan@...krlife.com>,
Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3] f2fs: deliver the accumulated 'issued' to __issue_discard_cmd_orderly() to meet the max_requests limit
Any of the following scenarios will send more than the number of
max_requests at a time, which will not meet the design of the
max_requests limit.
- Set max_ordered_discard larger than discard_granularity from userspace.
- It is a small size device, discard_granularity can be tuned to 1 in
f2fs_tuning_parameters().
We need to deliver the accumulated @issued to __issue_discard_cmd_orderly()
to meet the max_requests limit.
BTW, convert the parameter type of @issued in __submit_discard_cmd().
Signed-off-by: Yuwei Guan <Yuwei.Guan@...krlife.com>
Cc: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
---
fs/f2fs/segment.c | 24 +++++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
index a9099a754dd2..5268938466f5 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
@@ -1097,8 +1097,7 @@ static void __update_discard_tree_range(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
/* this function is copied from blkdev_issue_discard from block/blk-lib.c */
static int __submit_discard_cmd(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
struct discard_policy *dpolicy,
- struct discard_cmd *dc,
- unsigned int *issued)
+ struct discard_cmd *dc, int *issued)
{
struct block_device *bdev = dc->bdev;
unsigned int max_discard_blocks =
@@ -1379,8 +1378,8 @@ static void __queue_discard_cmd(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
mutex_unlock(&SM_I(sbi)->dcc_info->cmd_lock);
}
-static unsigned int __issue_discard_cmd_orderly(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
- struct discard_policy *dpolicy)
+static void __issue_discard_cmd_orderly(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
+ struct discard_policy *dpolicy, int *issued)
{
struct discard_cmd_control *dcc = SM_I(sbi)->dcc_info;
struct discard_cmd *prev_dc = NULL, *next_dc = NULL;
@@ -1388,7 +1387,6 @@ static unsigned int __issue_discard_cmd_orderly(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
struct discard_cmd *dc;
struct blk_plug plug;
unsigned int pos = dcc->next_pos;
- unsigned int issued = 0;
bool io_interrupted = false;
mutex_lock(&dcc->cmd_lock);
@@ -1415,9 +1413,9 @@ static unsigned int __issue_discard_cmd_orderly(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
}
dcc->next_pos = dc->lstart + dc->len;
- err = __submit_discard_cmd(sbi, dpolicy, dc, &issued);
+ err = __submit_discard_cmd(sbi, dpolicy, dc, issued);
- if (issued >= dpolicy->max_requests)
+ if (*issued >= dpolicy->max_requests)
break;
next:
node = rb_next(&dc->rb_node);
@@ -1433,10 +1431,8 @@ static unsigned int __issue_discard_cmd_orderly(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
mutex_unlock(&dcc->cmd_lock);
- if (!issued && io_interrupted)
- issued = -1;
-
- return issued;
+ if (!(*issued) && io_interrupted)
+ *issued = -1;
}
static unsigned int __wait_all_discard_cmd(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
struct discard_policy *dpolicy);
@@ -1464,8 +1460,10 @@ static int __issue_discard_cmd(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
if (i + 1 < dpolicy->granularity)
break;
- if (i + 1 < dcc->max_ordered_discard && dpolicy->ordered)
- return __issue_discard_cmd_orderly(sbi, dpolicy);
+ if (i + 1 < dcc->max_ordered_discard && dpolicy->ordered) {
+ __issue_discard_cmd_orderly(sbi, dpolicy, &issued);
+ return issued;
+ }
pend_list = &dcc->pend_list[i];
--
2.34.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists