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>
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>
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>
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>
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>
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>
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>
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>
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>
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>
Artem Bityutskiy