From c6f82fe90d7458e5fa190a6820bfc24f96b0de4e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jaegeuk Kim Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 16:45:30 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Revert "f2fs: put allocate_segment after refresh_sit_entry" This reverts commit 3436c4bdb30de421d46f58c9174669fbcfd40ce0. This makes a leak to register dirty segments. I reproduced the issue by modified postmark which injects a lot of file create/delete/update and finally triggers huge number of SSR allocations. Cc: # v4.10+ [Jaegeuk Kim: Change missing incorrect comment] Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim --- fs/f2fs/segment.c | 11 +++++------ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.c b/fs/f2fs/segment.c index df5c0b3af266..2bc9014bc8fb 100644 --- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c +++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c @@ -1881,14 +1881,13 @@ void allocate_data_block(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, struct page *page, stat_inc_block_count(sbi, curseg); - /* - * SIT information should be updated before segment allocation, - * since SSR needs latest valid block information. - */ - refresh_sit_entry(sbi, old_blkaddr, *new_blkaddr); - if (!__has_curseg_space(sbi, type)) sit_i->s_ops->allocate_segment(sbi, type, false); + /* + * SIT information should be updated after segment allocation, + * since we need to keep dirty segments precisely under SSR. + */ + refresh_sit_entry(sbi, old_blkaddr, *new_blkaddr); mutex_unlock(&sit_i->sentry_lock);