2
0
mirror of https://github.com/edk2-porting/linux-next.git synced 2024-12-25 05:34:00 +08:00
Commit Graph

10 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Kirill A. Shutemov
09cbfeaf1a mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros
PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time
ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page
cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE.

This promise never materialized.  And unlikely will.

We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to
PAGE_SIZE.  And it's constant source of confusion on whether
PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case,
especially on the border between fs and mm.

Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much
breakage to be doable.

Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special.  They are
not.

The changes are pretty straight-forward:

 - <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>;

 - <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>;

 - PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN};

 - page_cache_get() -> get_page();

 - page_cache_release() -> put_page();

This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using
script below.  For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files.
I've called spatch for them manually.

The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to
PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later.

There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach.  I'll
fix them manually in a separate patch.  Comments and documentation also
will be addressed with the separate patch.

virtual patch

@@
expression E;
@@
- E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT)
+ E

@@
expression E;
@@
- E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT)
+ E

@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT
+ PAGE_SHIFT

@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_SIZE
+ PAGE_SIZE

@@
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_MASK
+ PAGE_MASK

@@
expression E;
@@
- PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E)
+ PAGE_ALIGN(E)

@@
expression E;
@@
- page_cache_get(E)
+ get_page(E)

@@
expression E;
@@
- page_cache_release(E)
+ put_page(E)

Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-04 10:41:08 -07:00
Al Viro
5955102c99 wrappers for ->i_mutex access
parallel to mutex_{lock,unlock,trylock,is_locked,lock_nested},
inode_foo(inode) being mutex_foo(&inode->i_mutex).

Please, use those for access to ->i_mutex; over the coming cycle
->i_mutex will become rwsem, with ->lookup() done with it held
only shared.

Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2016-01-22 18:04:28 -05:00
Brian Foster
009c6e871e xfs: add missing ilock around dio write last extent alignment
The iomap codepath (via get_blocks()) acquires and release the inode
lock in the case of a direct write that requires block allocation. This
is because xfs_iomap_write_direct() allocates a transaction, which means
the ilock must be dropped and reacquired after the transaction is
allocated and reserved.

xfs_iomap_write_direct() invokes xfs_iomap_eof_align_last_fsb() before
the transaction is created and thus before the ilock is reacquired. This
can lead to calls to xfs_iread_extents() and reads of the in-core extent
list without any synchronization (via xfs_bmap_eof() and
xfs_bmap_last_extent()). xfs_iread_extents() assert fails if the ilock
is not held, but this is not currently seen in practice as the current
callers had already invoked xfs_bmapi_read().

What has been seen in practice are reports of crashes down in the
xfs_bmap_eof() codepath on direct writes due to seemingly bogus pointer
references from xfs_iext_get_ext(). While an explicit reproducer is not
currently available to confirm the cause of the problem, crash analysis
and code inspection from David Jeffrey had identified the insufficient
locking.

xfs_iomap_eof_align_last_fsb() is called from other contexts with the
inode lock already held, so we cannot acquire it therein.
__xfs_get_blocks() acquires and drops the ilock with variable flags to
cover the event that the extent list must be read in. The common case is
that __xfs_get_blocks() acquires the shared ilock. To provide locking
around the last extent alignment call without adding more lock cycles to
the dio path, update xfs_iomap_write_direct() to expect the shared ilock
held on entry and do the extent alignment under its protection. Demote
the lock, if necessary, from __xfs_get_blocks() and push the
xfs_qm_dqattach() call outside of the shared lock critical section.
Also, add an assert to document that the extent list is always expected
to be present in this path. Otherwise, we risk a call to
xfs_iread_extents() while under the shared ilock. This is safe as all
current callers have executed an xfs_bmapi_read() call under the current
iolock context.

Reported-by: David Jeffery <djeffery@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
2015-10-12 15:34:20 +11:00
Christoph Hellwig
70393313dd xfs: saner xfs_trans_commit interface
The flags argument to xfs_trans_commit is not useful for most callers, as
a commit of a transaction without a permanent log reservation must pass
0 here, and all callers for a transaction with a permanent log reservation
except for xfs_trans_roll must pass XFS_TRANS_RELEASE_LOG_RES.  So remove
the flags argument from the public xfs_trans_commit interfaces, and
introduce low-level __xfs_trans_commit variant just for xfs_trans_roll
that regrants a log reservation instead of releasing it.

Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
2015-06-04 13:48:08 +10:00
Christoph Hellwig
4906e21545 xfs: remove the flags argument to xfs_trans_cancel
xfs_trans_cancel takes two flags arguments: XFS_TRANS_RELEASE_LOG_RES and
XFS_TRANS_ABORT.  Both of them are a direct product of the transaction
state, and can be deducted:

 - any dirty transaction needs XFS_TRANS_ABORT to be properly canceled,
   and XFS_TRANS_ABORT is a noop for a transaction that is not dirty.
 - any transaction with a permanent log reservation needs
   XFS_TRANS_RELEASE_LOG_RES to be properly canceled, and passing
   XFS_TRANS_RELEASE_LOG_RES for a transaction without a permanent
   log reservation is invalid.

So just remove the flags argument and do the right thing.

Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
2015-06-04 13:47:56 +10:00
Dave Chinner
6a63ef064b Merge branch 'xfs-misc-fixes-for-4.1-3' into for-next
Conflicts:
	fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c
2015-04-13 11:40:16 +10:00
Christoph Hellwig
21c3ea1881 xfs: unlock i_mutex in xfs_break_layouts
We want to drop all I/O path locks when recalling layouts, and that includes
i_mutex for the write path.  Without this we get stuck processe when recalls
take too long.

[dchinner: fix build with !CONFIG_PNFS]

Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
2015-04-13 11:38:29 +10:00
Eric Sandeen
83d5f01858 xfs: cancel failed transaction in xfs_fs_commit_blocks()
If xfs_trans_reserve fails we don't cancel the transaction,
and we'll leak the allocated transaction pointer.

Spotted by Coverity.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <ssandeen@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
2015-02-24 10:15:18 +11:00
Christoph Hellwig
781355c6e5 xfs: recall pNFS layouts on conflicting access
Recall all outstanding pNFS layouts and truncates, writes and similar extent
list modifying operations.

Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
2015-02-16 11:59:50 +11:00
Christoph Hellwig
527851124d xfs: implement pNFS export operations
Add operations to export pNFS block layouts from an XFS filesystem.  See
the previous commit adding the operations for an explanation of them.

Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
2015-02-16 11:49:23 +11:00