Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] generic/064: allow 50 extents on F2FS after fcollapse
Chao Yu <[email protected]> Wed, 22 Jul 2026 09:22:26 +0800
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.fstests,net.sourceforge.lists.linux-f2fs-devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Zorro, On 7/19/2026 5:24 PM, Zorro Lang wrote: > On Tue, Jun 30, 2026 at 08:09:19PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote: >> On 6/30/26 00:37, Zorro Lang via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 12:46:01AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>>> This sounds odd. The test allocates a contigous range and then just does >>>> insert/collapse on it, which should not lead to any new data block >>>> allocations. Given that the test works fine on zoned XFS and btrfs >>>> with strict out of place write policies we know it does not require >>>> overwriting blocks to work as well. >>>> >>>> So I think something is fishy in f2fs if needs to allocate data blocks >>>> here. >>> >>> I have the same question with Christoph. Shouldn't fcollapse in F2FS just >>> remap the metadata instead of allocating new data blocks? >> >> Hi Christoph, Zorro, >> >> Let me explain it briefly, this is because f2fs has only one copy of reverse >> mapping table (aka SSA), for any checkpointed data, we can not modify SSA info >> directly during remap, otherwise, after sudden power-cut, we will suffer >> inconsistent issue in between reverse mapping table and mapping table. So, f2fs >> choose to rewrite for any checkpointed data. > > Hi Chao, > > Thank you for the detailed explanation. I now see why F2FS handles this > differently. > > Since this is by design for F2FS, I'd like to merge this fix to help f2fs > avoid this test failure at first. As for the potential write amplification > and performance overhead introduced by this rewrite strategy, that can be > discussed further on the f2fs list if necessary. It makes sense to me, we can discuss about the detailed implementation in f2fs list if there is any concern. > > I will merge the patch with some clarifying comments: > > /* > * F2FS uses a rewrite strategy for fcollapse/finsert on checkpointed data. > * Since F2FS has only a single copy of the reverse mapping table (SSA), > * directly remapping checkpointed metadata could cause inconsistency > * issues after a sudden power-cut. > */ > > Is this ^^ good to you, or feel free to give me a proper comment to add into > this patch. Looks good, thanks for the help! Thanks > > Thanks, > Zorro > >> >> Thanks,