linux.git/fs/ext4, branch v2.6.28

revert "percpu_counter: new function percpu_counter_sum_and_set"

2008-12-10T16:01:52+00:00

Revert

    commit e8ced39d5e8911c662d4d69a342b9d053eaaac4e
    Author: Mingming Cao 
    Date:   Fri Jul 11 19:27:31 2008 -0400

        percpu_counter: new function percpu_counter_sum_and_set

As described in

	revert "percpu counter: clean up percpu_counter_sum_and_set()"

the new percpu_counter_sum_and_set() is racy against updates to the
cpu-local accumulators on other CPUs.  Revert that change.

This means that ext4 will be slow again.  But correct.

Reported-by: Eric Dumazet 
Cc: "David S. Miller" 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Mingming Cao 
Cc: 
Cc: 		[2.6.27.x]
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton 
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

revert "percpu counter: clean up percpu_counter_sum_and_set()"

2008-12-10T16:01:52+00:00

Revert

    commit 1f7c14c62ce63805f9574664a6c6de3633d4a354
    Author: Mingming Cao 
    Date:   Thu Oct 9 12:50:59 2008 -0400

        percpu counter: clean up percpu_counter_sum_and_set()

Before this patch we had the following:

percpu_counter_sum(): return the percpu_counter's value

percpu_counter_sum_and_set(): return the percpu_counter's value, copying
that value into the central value and zeroing the per-cpu counters before
returning.

After this patch, percpu_counter_sum_and_set() has gone, and
percpu_counter_sum() gets the old percpu_counter_sum_and_set()
functionality.

Problem is, as Eric points out, the old percpu_counter_sum_and_set()
functionality was racy and wrong.  It zeroes out counters on "other" cpus,
without holding any locks which will prevent races agaist updates from
those other CPUS.

This patch reverts 1f7c14c62ce63805f9574664a6c6de3633d4a354.  This means
that percpu_counter_sum_and_set() still has the race, but
percpu_counter_sum() does not.

Note that this is not a simple revert - ext4 has since started using
percpu_counter_sum() for its dirty_blocks counter as well.

Note that this revert patch changes percpu_counter_sum() semantics.

Before the patch, a call to percpu_counter_sum() will bring the counter's
central counter mostly up-to-date, so a following percpu_counter_read()
will return a close value.

After this patch, a call to percpu_counter_sum() will leave the counter's
central accumulator unaltered, so a subsequent call to
percpu_counter_read() can now return a significantly inaccurate result.

If there is any code in the tree which was introduced after
e8ced39d5e8911c662d4d69a342b9d053eaaac4e was merged, and which depends
upon the new percpu_counter_sum() semantics, that code will break.

Reported-by: Eric Dumazet 
Cc: "David S. Miller" 
Cc: Peter Zijlstra 
Cc: Mingming Cao 
Cc: 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton 
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

ext4: add checksum calculation when clearing UNINIT flag in ext4_new_inode

2008-11-07T14:21:01+00:00

When initializing an uninitialized block group in ext4_new_inode(),
its block group checksum must be re-calculated.  This fixes a race
when several threads try to allocate a new inode in an UNINIT'd group.

There is some question whether we need to be initializing the block
bitmap in ext4_new_inode() at all, but for now, if we are going to
init the block group, let's eliminate the race.

Signed-off-by: Frederic Bohe 
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o"

ext4: Mark the buffer_heads as dirty and uptodate after prepare_write

2008-11-07T14:06:45+00:00

We need to make sure we mark the buffer_heads as dirty and uptodate
so that block_write_full_page write them correctly.

This fixes mmap corruptions that can occur in low memory situations.

Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V 
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o"

ext4: calculate journal credits correctly

2008-11-06T21:49:36+00:00

This fixes a 2.6.27 regression which was introduced in commit a02908f1.

We weren't passing the chunk parameter down to the two subections,
ext4_indirect_trans_blocks() and ext4_ext_index_trans_blocks(), with
the result that massively overestimate the amount of credits needed by
ext4_da_writepages, especially in the non-extents case.  This causes
failures especially on /boot partitions, which tend to be small and
non-extent using since GRUB doesn't handle extents.

This patch fixes the bug reported by Joseph Fannin at:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11964

Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o"

ext4: wait on all pending commits in ext4_sync_fs()

2008-11-03T23:10:55+00:00

In ext4_sync_fs, we only wait for a commit to finish if we started it,
but there may be one already in progress which will not be synced.

In the case of a data=ordered umount with pending long symlinks which
are delayed due to a long list of other I/O on the backing block
device, this causes the buffer associated with the long symlinks to
not be moved to the inode dirty list in the second phase of
fsync_super.  Then, before they can be dirtied again, kjournald exits,
seeing the UMOUNT flag and the dirty pages are never written to the
backing block device, causing long symlink corruption and exposing new
or previously freed block data to userspace.

To ensure all commits are synced, we flush all journal commits now
when sync_fs'ing ext4.

Signed-off-by: Arthur Jones 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton 
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" 
Cc: Eric Sandeen 
Cc:

ext4: Convert to host order before using the values.

2008-11-04T14:11:26+00:00

Use le16_to_cpu to read the s_reserved_gdt_blocks values
from super block.

Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V 
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o"

ext4: fix missing ext4_unlock_group in error path

2008-11-04T14:10:50+00:00

If we try to free a block which is already freed, the code was
returning without first unlocking the group.

Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V 
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o"

delay capable() check in ext4_has_free_blocks()

2008-10-28T04:08:17+00:00

As reported by Eric Paris, the capable() check in ext4_has_free_blocks()
sometimes causes SELinux denials.

We can rearrange the logic so that we only try to use the root-reserved
blocks when necessary, and even then we can move the capable() test
to last, to avoid the check most of the time.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen 
Reviewed-by: Mingming Cao 
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o"

merge ext4_claim_free_blocks & ext4_has_free_blocks

2008-10-28T04:08:12+00:00

Mingming pointed out that ext4_claim_free_blocks & ext4_has_free_blocks
are largely cut & pasted; they can be collapsed/merged as follows.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen 
Reviewed-by: Mingming Cao 
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o"