summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/fs/ubifs/file.c
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
2009-01-05fs: symlink write_begin allocation context fixNick Piggin1-4/+5
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 <npiggin@suse.de> Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <stable@kernel.org> [2.6.28.x] Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> [ 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 <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-12-31UBIFS: fix checkpatch.pl warningsArtem Bityutskiy1-2/+2
These are mostly long lines and wrong indentation warning fixes. But also there are two volatile variables and checkpatch.pl complains about them: WARNING: Use of volatile is usually wrong: see Documentation/volatile-considered-harmful.txt + volatile int gc_seq; WARNING: Use of volatile is usually wrong: see Documentation/volatile-considered-harmful.txt + volatile int gced_lnum; Well, we anyway use smp_wmb() for c->gc_seq and c->gced_lnum, so these 'volatile' modifiers can be just dropped. Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
2008-12-23UBIFS: use PAGE_CACHE_MASK correctlyArtem Bityutskiy1-2/+2
It has high bits set, not low bits set as the UBIFS code assumed. Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
2008-11-21UBIFS: pre-allocate bulk-read bufferArtem Bityutskiy1-9/+22
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 <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
2008-11-21UBIFS: do not allocate too muchArtem Bityutskiy1-24/+46
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 <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
2008-11-21UBIFS: do not print scary memory allocation warningsArtem Bityutskiy1-2/+2
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 <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
2008-11-06UBIFS: endian handling fixes and annotationsHarvey Harrison1-2/+2
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] <noident> 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 <harvey.harrison@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
2008-09-30UBIFS: fix bulk-read handling uptodate pagesAdrian Hunter1-5/+11
Bulk-read skips uptodate pages but this was putting its array index out and causing it to treat subsequent pages as holes. Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <ext-adrian.hunter@nokia.com>
2008-09-30UBIFS: ensure data read beyond i_size is zeroed out correctlyAdrian Hunter1-2/+8
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <ext-adrian.hunter@nokia.com>
2008-09-30UBIFS: add bulk-read facilityAdrian Hunter1-0/+248
Some flash media are capable of reading sequentially at faster rates. UBIFS bulk-read facility is designed to take advantage of that, by reading in one go consecutive data nodes that are also located consecutively in the same LEB. Read speed on Arm platform with OneNAND goes from 17 MiB/s to 19 MiB/s. Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <ext-adrian.hunter@nokia.com>
2008-08-21UBIFS: fix zero-length truncationsArtem Bityutskiy1-4/+16
Always allow truncations to zero, even if budgeting thinks there is no space. UBIFS reserves some space for deletions anyway. Otherwise, the following happans: 1. create a file, and write as much as possible there, until ENOSPC 2. truncate the file, which fails with ENOSPC, which is not good. Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
2008-08-13UBIFS: support splice_writeZoltan Sogor1-0/+1
Signed-off-by: Zoltan Sogor <weth@inf.u-szeged.hu> Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
2008-08-13UBIFS: align inode data to eightArtem Bityutskiy1-2/+2
UBIFS aligns node lengths to 8, so budgeting has to do the same. Well, direntry, inode, and page budgets are already aligned, but not inode data budget (e.g., data in special devices or symlinks). Do this for inode data as well. Also, add corresponding debugging checks. Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
2008-08-13UBIFS: improve debuggingArtem Bityutskiy1-1/+2
1. Print inode mode in some of debugging messages 2. Add few more useful assertions Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
2008-07-27[PATCH] get rid of indirect users of namei.hAl Viro1-0/+1
fs.h needs path.h, not namei.h; nfs_fs.h doesn't need it at all. Several places in the tree needed direct include. Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2008-07-15UBIFS: add new flash file systemArtem Bityutskiy1-0/+1275
This is a new flash file system. See http://www.linux-mtd.infradead.org/doc/ubifs.html Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <ext-adrian.hunter@nokia.com>