Commit graph

13 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
KaiGai Kohei
c9f700f840 [JFFS2][XATTR] using 'delete marker' for xdatum/xref deletion
- When xdatum is removed, a new xdatum with 'delete marker' is
  written. (version==0xffffffff means 'delete marker')
- When xref is removed, a new xref with 'delete marker' is written.
  (odd-numbered xseqno means 'delete marker')

- delete_xattr_(datum/xref)_delay() are new deletion functions
  are added. We can only use them if we can detect the target
  obsolete xdatum/xref as a orphan or errir one.
  (e.g when inode deletion, or detecting crc error)

[1/3] jffs2-xattr-v6-01-delete_marker.patch

Signed-off-by: KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>
Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
2006-06-27 16:16:26 +01:00
David Woodhouse
0cfc7da3ff Merge git://git.infradead.org/jffs2-xattr-2.6
Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
2006-05-20 17:27:32 +01:00
David Woodhouse
aef9ab4784 [JFFS2] Support new device nodes
Device node major/minor numbers are just stored in the payload of a single
data node. Just extend that to 4 bytes and use new_encode_dev() for it.

We only use the 4-byte format if we _need_ to, if !old_valid_dev(foo).
This preserves backwards compatibility with older code as much as
possible. If we do make devices with major or minor numbers above 255, and
then mount the file system with the old code, it'll just read the first
two bytes and get the numbers wrong. If it comes to garbage-collect it,
it'll then write back those wrong numbers. But that's about the best we
can expect.

Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
2006-05-19 00:28:49 +01:00
KaiGai Kohei
20a92fc74c Merge git://git.infradead.org/mtd-2.6 2006-05-19 00:43:53 +09:00
David Woodhouse
ba9627b85f [JFFS2] Repack some on-medium structures. ARM is weirder than I thought.
We have to pack at least the jint16_t structure, because otherwise it'll
be four bytes in size. Thankfully, we can do that and _not_ pack the
actual node structures, and the compiler still doesn't emit stupid code.

Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
2006-05-16 23:03:08 +01:00
David Woodhouse
3e68fbb59b [JFFS2] Don't pack on-medium structures, because GCC emits crappy code
If we use __attribute__((packed)), GCC will _also_ assume that the
structures aren't sensibly aligned, and it'll emit code to cope with
that instead of straight word load/save. This can be _very_ suboptimal
on architectures like ARM.

Ideally, we want an attribute which just tells GCC not to do any
padding, without the alignment side-effects. In the absense of that,
we'll just drop the 'packed' attribute and hope that everything stays as
it was (which to be fair is fairly much what we expect). And add some
paranoia checks in the initialisation code, which should be optimised
away completely in the normal case.

Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
2006-05-15 00:49:43 +01:00
KaiGai Kohei
aa98d7cf59 [JFFS2][XATTR] XATTR support on JFFS2 (version. 5)
This attached patches provide xattr support including POSIX-ACL and
SELinux support on JFFS2 (version.5).

There are some significant differences from previous version posted
at last December.
The biggest change is addition of EBS(Erase Block Summary) support.
Currently, both kernel and usermode utility (sumtool) can recognize
xattr nodes which have JFFS2_NODETYPE_XATTR/_XREF nodetype.

In addition, some bugs are fixed.
- A potential race condition was fixed.
- Unexpected fail when updating a xattr by same name/value pair was fixed.
- A bug when removing xattr name/value pair was fixed.

The fundamental structures (such as using two new nodetypes and exclusion
mechanism by rwsem) are unchanged. But most of implementation were reviewed
and updated if necessary.
Espacially, we had to change several internal implementations related to
load_xattr_datum() to avoid a potential race condition.

[1/2] xattr_on_jffs2.kernel.version-5.patch
[2/2] xattr_on_jffs2.utils.version-5.patch

Signed-off-by: KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>
Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
2006-05-13 15:09:47 +09:00
Thomas Gleixner
182ec4eee3 [JFFS2] Clean up trailing white spaces
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
2005-11-07 14:18:56 +01:00
Ferenc Havasi
2bc9764c48 [JFFS2] Rename jffs2_summary_node to jffs2_raw_summary
Signed-off-by: Ferenc Havasi <havasi@inf.u-szeged.hu>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
2005-11-06 22:32:45 +01:00
Ferenc Havasi
e631ddba58 [JFFS2] Add erase block summary support (mount time improvement)
The goal of summary is to speed up the mount time. Erase block summary (EBS)
stores summary information at the end of every (closed) erase block. It is
no longer necessary to scan all nodes separetly (and read all pages of them)
just read this "small" summary, where every information is stored which is
needed at mount time.

This summary information is stored in a JFFS2_FEATURE_RWCOMPAT_DELETE. During
the mount process if there is no summary info the orignal scan process will
be executed. EBS works with NAND and NOR flashes, too.

There is a user space tool called sumtool to generate this summary
information for a JFFS2 image.

Signed-off-by: Ferenc Havasi <havasi@inf.u-szeged.hu>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
2005-11-06 21:29:48 +01:00
Ferenc Havasi
2227c0ba4b [jffs2] Remove compressor lzo and lzari
Remove unused compressor code

Signed-off-by: Ferenc Havasi <havasi@inf.u-szeged.hu>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
2005-11-06 17:31:24 +01:00
Artem B. Bityutskiy
f302cd028c [JFFS2] Namespace clean up
Rename functions to a name matching the functionality.
Remove stall debug code

Signed-off-by: Artem B. Bityutskiy <dedekind@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
2005-11-06 17:17:32 +01:00
Linus Torvalds
1da177e4c3 Linux-2.6.12-rc2
Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
infrastructure for it.

Let it rip!
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00