kernel.git/fs/ubifs, branch linux-2.6.28.y

fs: symlink write_begin allocation context fix

2009-01-18T18:43:46Z

commit 54566b2c1594c2326a645a3551f9d989f7ba3c5e upstream. With the write_begin/write_end aops, page_symlink was broken because it could no longer pass a GFP_NOFS type mask into the point where the allocations happened. They are done in write_begin, which would always assume that the filesystem can be entered from reclaim. This bug could cause filesystem deadlocks. The funny thing with having a gfp_t mask there is that it doesn't really allow the caller to arbitrarily tinker with the context in which it can be called. It couldn't ever be GFP_ATOMIC, for example, because it needs to take the page lock. The only thing any callers care about is __GFP_FS anyway, so turn that into a single flag. Add a new flag for write_begin, AOP_FLAG_NOFS. Filesystems can now act on this flag in their write_begin function. Change __grab_cache_page to accept a nofs argument as well, to honour that flag (while we're there, change the name to grab_cache_page_write_begin which is more instructive and does away with random leading underscores). This is really a more flexible way to go in the end anyway -- if a filesystem happens to want any extra allocations aside from the pagecache ones in ints write_begin function, it may now use GFP_KERNEL (rather than GFP_NOFS) for common case allocations (eg. ocfs2_alloc_write_ctxt, for a random example). [kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com: fix ubifs] [kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com: fix fuse] Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton [ Cleaned up the calling convention: just pass in the AOP flags untouched to the grab_cache_page_write_begin() function. That just simplifies everybody, and may even allow future expansion of the logic. - Linus ] Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

UBIFS: pre-allocate bulk-read buffer

2008-11-21T16:59:33Z

To avoid memory allocation failure during bulk-read, pre-allocate a bulk-read buffer, so that if there is only one bulk-reader at a time, it would just use the pre-allocated buffer and would not do any memory allocation. However, if there are more than 1 bulk- reader, then only one reader would use the pre-allocated buffer, while the other reader would allocate the buffer for itself. Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy

UBIFS: do not allocate too much

2008-11-21T16:59:25Z

Bulk-read allocates 128KiB or more using kmalloc. The allocation starts failing often when the memory gets fragmented. UBIFS still works fine in this case, because it falls-back to standard (non-optimized) read method, though. This patch teaches bulk-read to allocate exactly the amount of memory it needs, instead of allocating 128KiB every time. This patch is also a preparation to the further fix where we'll have a pre-allocated bulk-read buffer as well. For example, now the @bu object is prepared in 'ubifs_bulk_read()', so we could path either pre-allocated or allocated information to 'ubifs_do_bulk_read()' later. Or teaching 'ubifs_do_bulk_read()' not to allocate 'bu->buf' if it is already there. Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy

UBIFS: do not print scary memory allocation warnings

2008-11-21T16:59:16Z

Bulk-read allocates a lot of memory with 'kmalloc()', and when it is/gets fragmented 'kmalloc()' fails with a scarry warning. But because bulk-read is just an optimization, UBIFS keeps working fine. Supress the warning by passing __GFP_NOWARN option to 'kmalloc()'. This patch also introduces a macro for the magic 128KiB constant. This is just neater. Note, this is not really fixes the problem we had, but just hides the warnings. The further patches fix the problem. Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy

UBIFS: allow for gaps when dirtying the LPT

2008-11-07T10:11:52Z

The LPT may have gaps in it because initially empty LEBs are not added by mkfs.ubifs - because it does not know how many there are. Then UBIFS allocates empty LEBs in the reverse order that they are discovered i.e. they are added to, and removed from, the front of a list. That creates a gap in the middle of the LPT. The function dirtying the LPT tree (for the purpose of small model garbage collection) assumed that a gap could only occur at the very end of the LPT and stopped dirtying prematurely, which in turn resulted in the LPT running out of space - something that is designed to be impossible. Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter

UBIFS: fix compilation warnings

2008-11-06T09:06:31Z

We print 'ino_t' type using '%lu' printk() placeholder, but this results in many warnings when compiling for Alpha platform. Fix this by adding (unsingned long) casts. Fixes these warnings: fs/ubifs/journal.c:693: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/journal.c:1131: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/dir.c:163: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/tnc.c:2680: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/tnc.c:2700: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 5 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/replay.c:1066: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 7 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/orphan.c:108: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/orphan.c:135: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/orphan.c:142: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/orphan.c:154: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/orphan.c:159: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/orphan.c:451: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/orphan.c:539: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/orphan.c:612: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/orphan.c:843: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/orphan.c:856: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/recovery.c:1438: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/recovery.c:1443: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/recovery.c:1475: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/recovery.c:1495: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:105: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 3 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:105: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 3 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:110: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 3 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:110: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 3 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:114: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 3 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:114: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 3 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:118: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 3 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:118: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 3 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1591: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1671: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1674: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 5 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1680: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1699: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 5 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1788: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 5 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1821: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 5 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1833: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 5 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1924: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1932: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1938: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1945: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1953: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1960: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1967: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1973: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1988: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 4 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:1991: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 5 has type 'ino_t' fs/ubifs/debug.c:2009: warning: format '%lu' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 2 has type 'ino_t' Reported-by: Randy Dunlap Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy

UBIFS: endian handling fixes and annotations

2008-11-06T09:06:19Z

Noticed by sparse: fs/ubifs/file.c:75:2: warning: restricted __le64 degrades to integer fs/ubifs/file.c:629:4: warning: restricted __le64 degrades to integer fs/ubifs/dir.c:431:3: warning: restricted __le64 degrades to integer This should be checked to ensure the ubifs_assert is working as intended, I've done the suggested annotation in this patch. fs/ubifs/sb.c:298:6: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types) fs/ubifs/sb.c:298:6: expected int [signed] [assigned] tmp fs/ubifs/sb.c:298:6: got restricted __le64 [usertype] fs/ubifs/sb.c:299:19: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types) fs/ubifs/sb.c:299:19: expected restricted __le64 [usertype] atime_sec fs/ubifs/sb.c:299:19: got int [signed] [assigned] tmp fs/ubifs/sb.c:300:19: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types) fs/ubifs/sb.c:300:19: expected restricted __le64 [usertype] ctime_sec fs/ubifs/sb.c:300:19: got int [signed] [assigned] tmp fs/ubifs/sb.c:301:19: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types) fs/ubifs/sb.c:301:19: expected restricted __le64 [usertype] mtime_sec fs/ubifs/sb.c:301:19: got int [signed] [assigned] tmp This looks like a bugfix as your tmp was a u32 so there was truncation in the atime, mtime, ctime value, probably not intentional, add a tmp_le64 and use it here. fs/ubifs/key.h:348:9: warning: cast to restricted __le32 fs/ubifs/key.h:348:9: warning: cast to restricted __le32 fs/ubifs/key.h:419:9: warning: cast to restricted __le32 Read from the annotated union member instead. fs/ubifs/recovery.c:175:13: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types) fs/ubifs/recovery.c:175:13: expected unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] save_flags fs/ubifs/recovery.c:175:13: got restricted __le32 [usertype] flags fs/ubifs/recovery.c:186:13: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types) fs/ubifs/recovery.c:186:13: expected restricted __le32 [usertype] flags fs/ubifs/recovery.c:186:13: got unsigned int [unsigned] [usertype] save_flags Do byteshifting at compile time of the flag value. Annotate the saved_flags as le32. fs/ubifs/debug.c:368:10: warning: cast to restricted __le32 fs/ubifs/debug.c:368:10: warning: cast from restricted __le64 Should be checked if the truncation was intentional, I've changed the printk to print the full width. Signed-off-by: Harvey Harrison Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy

UBIFS: remove printk

2008-11-06T09:06:14Z

Remove the "UBIFS background thread ubifs_bgd0_0 started" message. We kill the background thread when we switch to R/O mode, and start it again whan we switch to R/W mode. OLPC is doing this many times during boot, and we see this message many times as well, which is irritating. So just kill the message. Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy

Merge branch 'linux-next' of git://git.infradead.org/ubifs-2.6

2008-10-20T16:19:03Z

* 'linux-next' of git://git.infradead.org/ubifs-2.6: (25 commits) UBIFS: fix ubifs_compress commentary UBIFS: amend printk UBIFS: do not read unnecessary bytes when unpacking bits UBIFS: check buffer length when scanning for LPT nodes UBIFS: correct condition to eliminate unecessary assignment UBIFS: add more debugging messages for LPT UBIFS: fix bulk-read handling uptodate pages UBIFS: improve garbage collection UBIFS: allow for sync_fs when read-only UBIFS: commit on sync_fs UBIFS: correct comment for commit_on_unmount UBIFS: update dbg_dump_inode UBIFS: fix commentary UBIFS: fix races in bit-fields UBIFS: ensure data read beyond i_size is zeroed out correctly UBIFS: correct key comparison UBIFS: use bit-fields when possible UBIFS: check data CRC when in error state UBIFS: improve znode splitting rules UBIFS: add no_chk_data_crc mount option ...

UBIFS: fix ubifs_compress commentary

2008-10-19T10:01:37Z

Update the comment for ubifs_compress(), which incorrectly states that it returnsa success/failure indicator. Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy