Hi Jaegeuk,
On 2016/9/2 4:46, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> Fix wrong condition check for defragmentation of a file.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/f2fs/file.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/file.c b/fs/f2fs/file.c
> index 37c24be..a8aa6fd 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/file.c
> @@ -2037,7 +2037,7 @@ static int f2fs_defragment_range(struct f2fs_sb_info *sbi,
> * avoid defragment running in SSR mode when free section are allocated
> * intensively
> */
> - if (has_not_enough_free_secs(sbi, sec_num)) {
> + if (free_sections(sbi) <= sec_num) {
Why don't we check dirty dentry/node/imeta blocks here? they will be generated
at any time after f2fs_balance_fs. So, isn't original condition more strict than
new one?
Thanks,
> err = -EAGAIN;
> goto out;
> }
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
