Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: propagate resizable_tail_secno mount option

[Chao Yu]

On 8/25/26 23:48, Daeho Jeong wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 1:42 AM Wenjie Qi <qwjhust@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Mount parsing stores resizable_tail_secno in F2FS_CTX_INFO(ctx),
>> but it does not mark the option in ctx->spec_mask. As a
>> result, f2fs_apply_options() never copies the value into
>> F2FS_OPTION(sbi), so adjust_pinned_area_boundary() ignores
>> the requested tail reservation.
>>
>> Set the missing spec_mask bit and propagate the parsed value
>> through f2fs_apply_options().
>>
>> Fixes: d8745ba260ab ("f2fs: support resizable tail section and unify pinned allocation")
>> Signed-off-by: Wenjie Qi <qiwenjie@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> QEMU validation summary:
>> - plain mount reported `pinned_area_max_secno=502`
>> - `-o resizable_tail_secno=1` reported `pinned_area_max_secno=501`
>> - bounded fill stayed within the reduced boundary through the first
>>   `FALLOC_RET=-1 ERRNO=28`
>>
>>  fs/f2fs/super.c | 5 +++++
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/super.c b/fs/f2fs/super.c
>> index c1e315282ec..6238dfe6f4e 100644
>> --- a/fs/f2fs/super.c
>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/super.c
>> @@ -406,6 +406,7 @@ static match_table_t f2fs_checkpoint_tokens = {
>>  #define F2FS_SPEC_errors                       (1 << 23)
>>  #define F2FS_SPEC_lookup_mode                  (1 << 24)
>>  #define F2FS_SPEC_reserve_node                 (1 << 25)
>> +#define F2FS_SPEC_resizable_tail_secno         BIT(26)
>>
>>  struct f2fs_fs_context {
>>         struct f2fs_mount_info info;
>> @@ -1250,6 +1251,7 @@ static int f2fs_parse_param(struct fs_context *fc, struct fs_parameter *param)
>>                 break;
>>         case Opt_resizable_tail_secno:
>>                 F2FS_CTX_INFO(ctx).resizable_tail_secno = result.uint_32;
>> +               ctx->spec_mask |= F2FS_SPEC_resizable_tail_secno;
>>                 break;
>>         }
>>         return 0;
>> @@ -1779,6 +1781,9 @@ static void f2fs_apply_options(struct fs_context *fc, struct super_block *sb)
>>                 F2FS_OPTION(sbi).errors = F2FS_CTX_INFO(ctx).errors;
>>         if (ctx->spec_mask & F2FS_SPEC_lookup_mode)
>>                 F2FS_OPTION(sbi).lookup_mode = F2FS_CTX_INFO(ctx).lookup_mode;
>> +       if (ctx->spec_mask & F2FS_SPEC_resizable_tail_secno)
>> +               F2FS_OPTION(sbi).resizable_tail_secno =
>> +                               F2FS_CTX_INFO(ctx).resizable_tail_secno;
> 
> Hi Wenjie,
> 
> The original patch is still under review. If you found an issue or
> have feedback, please reply with a review comment on the original
> patch thread instead.
> 
> Also, if this patch was auto-generated by AI, please adjust your
> system accordingly.

Hi Wenjie,

I agree w/ Daeho, please adjust policy to give comment on pending patch
rather than just patching w/ a new one.

Thanks,

> 
> Thanks,
> 
>>
>>         f2fs_apply_compression(fc, sb);
>>         f2fs_apply_test_dummy_encryption(fc, sb);
>>
>> base-commit: d8745ba260abbcaf75fd458881381019ab3c5c07
>> --
>> 2.43.0
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
>> Linux-f2fs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel