[PATCH 4.11 087/114] Revert "f2fs: put allocate_segment after refresh_sit_entry"

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

4.11-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@xxxxxxxxxx>

commit c6f82fe90d7458e5fa190a6820bfc24f96b0de4e upstream.

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.

[Jaegeuk Kim: Change missing incorrect comment]
Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

---
 fs/f2fs/segment.c |    9 ++++-----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

--- a/fs/f2fs/segment.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/segment.c
@@ -1788,15 +1788,14 @@ void allocate_data_block(struct f2fs_sb_
 
 	stat_inc_block_count(sbi, curseg);
 
+	if (!__has_curseg_space(sbi, type))
+		sit_i->s_ops->allocate_segment(sbi, type, false);
 	/*
-	 * SIT information should be updated before segment allocation,
-	 * since SSR needs latest valid block information.
+	 * 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);
 
-	if (!__has_curseg_space(sbi, type))
-		sit_i->s_ops->allocate_segment(sbi, type, false);
-
 	mutex_unlock(&sit_i->sentry_lock);
 
 	if (page && IS_NODESEG(type))