From: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 02:34:14 +0000 (+0800)
Subject: f2fs: fix to correct no_fggc_candidate
X-Git-Tag: v4.15-rc1~83^2~41
X-Git-Url: https://www.infradead.org/git/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=7e515b31d44dcd20a98c938dfdc21877a30042a0;p=linux.git
f2fs: fix to correct no_fggc_candidate
There may be extreme case as below:
For one section contains one segment, and there are total 100 segments
with 10% over-privision ratio in f2fs partition, fggc_threshold will
be rounded down to 460 instead of 460.8 as below caclulation:
sbi->fggc_threshold = div_u64((u64)(main_count - ovp_count) *
BLKS_PER_SEC(sbi), (main_count - resv_count));
If section usage is as:
60 segments which contain 460 valid blocks
40 segments which contain 462 valid blocks
As valid block number in all sections is large than fggc_threshold, so
none of them will be chosen as candidate due to incorrect fggc_threshold.
Let's just soften the term of choosing foreground GC candidates.
Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
---
diff --git a/fs/f2fs/segment.h b/fs/f2fs/segment.h
index 5a1f7b9c8a72..8d93652d5b6a 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/segment.h
+++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.h
@@ -731,7 +731,7 @@ static inline block_t sum_blk_addr(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi, int base, int type)
static inline bool no_fggc_candidate(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
unsigned int secno)
{
- if (get_valid_blocks(sbi, GET_SEG_FROM_SEC(sbi, secno), true) >=
+ if (get_valid_blocks(sbi, GET_SEG_FROM_SEC(sbi, secno), true) >
sbi->fggc_threshold)
return true;
return false;