commit cf33c1ee5254c6a430bc1538232b49c3ea13e613 upstream.

This patch try to fix the building error on MIPS. The reason is MIPS
has already defined the PTR macro, which conflicts with the PTR macro
in include/uapi/linux/bcache.h.

[fixed by mlyle: corrected a line-length issue]

Signed-off-by: Huacai Chen <chenhc@lemote.com>
Reviewed-by: Michael Lyle <mlyle@lyle.org>
Signed-off-by: Michael Lyle <mlyle@lyle.org>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

commit 91af8300d9c1d7c6b6a2fd754109e08d4798b8d8 upstream.

In bcache code, sysfs entries are created before all resources get
allocated, e.g. allocation thread of a cache set.

There is posibility for NULL pointer deference if a resource is accessed
but which is not initialized yet. Indeed Jorg Bornschein catches one on
cache set allocation thread and gets a kernel oops.

The reason for this bug is, when bch_bucket_alloc() is called during
cache set registration and attaching, ca->alloc_thread is not properly
allocated and initialized yet, call wake_up_process() on ca->alloc_thread
triggers NULL pointer deference failure. A simple and fast fix is, before
waking up ca->alloc_thread, checking whether it is allocated, and only
wake up ca->alloc_thread when it is not NULL.

Signed-off-by: Coly Li <colyli@suse.de>
Reported-by: Jorg Bornschein <jb@capsec.org>
Cc: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Michael Lyle <mlyle@lyle.org>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

bch_allocator_thread() is calling try_to_freeze(), but that's just an
expensive no-op given the fact that the thread is not marked freezable.

Bucket allocator has to be up and running to the very last stages of the
suspend, as the bcache I/O that's in flight (think of writing an
hibernation image to a swap device served by bcache).

Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>

This was originally added as at optimization that for various reasons isn't
needed anymore, but it does add a lot of nasty corner cases (and it was
responsible for some recently fixed bugs). Just get rid of it now.

Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <kmo@daterainc.com>

This changes the bucket allocation reserves to use _real_ reserves - separate
freelists - instead of watermarks, which if nothing else makes the current code
saner to reason about and is going to be important in the future when we add
support for multiple btrees.

It also adds btree_check_reserve(), which checks (and locks) the reserves for
both bucket allocation and memory allocation for btree nodes; the old code just
kinda sorta assumed that since (e.g. for btree node splits) it had the root
locked and that meant no other threads could try to make use of the same
reserve; this technically should have been ok for memory allocation (we should
always have a reserve for memory allocation (the btree node cache is used as a
reserve and we preallocate it)), but multiple btrees will mean that locking the
root won't be sufficient anymore, and for the bucket allocation reserve it was
technically possible for the old code to deadlock.

Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <kmo@daterainc.com>

This means the garbage collection code can better check for data and metadata
pointers to the same buckets.

Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <kmo@daterainc.com>

Change the invalidate tracepoint to indicate how much data we're invalidating,
and change the alloc tracepoints to indicate what offset they're for.

Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <kmo@daterainc.com>

When deciding what order to reuse buckets we take into account both the bucket's
priority (which indicates lru order) and also the amount of live data in that
bucket. The way they were scaled together wasn't as correct as it could be...
this patch improves and documents it.

Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <kmo@daterainc.com>

We need a reserve for allocating buckets for new btree nodes - and now that
we've got multiple btrees, it really needs to be per btree.

This reworks the reserves so we've got separate freelists for each reserve
instead of watermarks, which seems to make things a bit cleaner, and it adds
some code so that btree_split() can make sure the reserve is available before it
starts.

Signed-off-by: Kent Overstreet <kmo@daterainc.com>