[GIT PULL] Ext3, reiserfs, udf & isofs fixes

[GIT PULL] Ext3, reiserfs, udf & isofs fixes

[Jan Kara]

  Hello Linus,

  could you please pull from

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jack/linux-fs.git for_linus

The pull contains a bunch of ext3 cleanups and minor improvements, major
reiserfs locking changes which should hopefully fix deadlocks introduced by BKL
removal, and udf/isofs changes to refuse mounting fs rw instead of mounting it
ro automatically which makes eject button work as expected for all media (see
the changelog for why userspace should be ok with this change).

Top of the tree is 97a2847. The full shortlog is:

Eric Sandeen (1):
      ext3: allow specifying external journal by pathname mount option

Jan Kara (4):
      isofs: Refuse RW mount of the filesystem instead of making it RO
      udf: Standardize return values in mount sequence
      udf: Refuse RW mount of the filesystem instead of making it RO
      Merge branch 'for-3.12' of git://git.kernel.org/.../jeffm/linux-reiserfs into for_next_testing

Jeff Mahoney (3):
      reiserfs: locking, push write lock out of xattr code
      reiserfs: locking, handle nested locks properly
      reiserfs: locking, release lock around quota operations

Nathaniel Yazdani (1):
      jbd: remove unneeded semicolon

Paul Gortmaker (2):
      jbd: relocate assert after state lock in journal_commit_transaction()
      jbd: use a single printk for jbd_debug()

The diffstat is

 Documentation/filesystems/ext3.txt |   7 +-
 fs/ext3/super.c                    |  43 +++++
 fs/isofs/inode.c                   |  16 +-
 fs/jbd/commit.c                    |   2 +-
 fs/jbd/journal.c                   |  18 ++
 fs/reiserfs/bitmap.c               |  22 ++-
 fs/reiserfs/dir.c                  |   7 +-
 fs/reiserfs/fix_node.c             |  26 +--
 fs/reiserfs/inode.c                | 114 ++++++-------
 fs/reiserfs/ioctl.c                |   7 +-
 fs/reiserfs/journal.c              | 104 +++++------
 fs/reiserfs/lock.c                 |  43 ++---
 fs/reiserfs/namei.c                |  24 +--
 fs/reiserfs/prints.c               |   5 +-
 fs/reiserfs/reiserfs.h             |  36 ++--
 fs/reiserfs/resize.c               |  10 +-
 fs/reiserfs/stree.c                |  74 ++++----
 fs/reiserfs/super.c                |  75 ++++----
 fs/reiserfs/xattr.c                |  46 ++---
 fs/reiserfs/xattr_acl.c            |  16 +-
 fs/udf/super.c                     | 342 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
 include/linux/jbd.h                |  17 +-
 22 files changed, 609 insertions(+), 445 deletions(-)

							Thanks
								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR

Re: [GIT PULL] Ext3, reiserfs, udf & isofs fixes

[Linus Torvalds]

On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
>
> udf/isofs changes to refuse mounting fs rw instead of mounting it
> ro automatically which makes eject button work as expected for all media (see
> the changelog for why userspace should be ok with this change).

Pulled. However, these are kind of odd.

For trying _remount_ something read-only, isofs returns the logical
EROFS error code.

But for trying to mount it in the first place, it returns EACCES,
which sounds insane. It's not a permission problem - no amount of
permissions will ever make it work.

UDF always does EACCES, regardless of mount/remount.

Is there some fundamental reason for the insane error code? Does user
space do the wrong thing if we were to just always return "EROFS"
which makes much more sense?

                 Linus

Re: [GIT PULL] Ext3, reiserfs, udf & isofs fixes

[Jan Kara]

On Fri 06-09-13 09:11:18, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> wrote:
> >
> > udf/isofs changes to refuse mounting fs rw instead of mounting it
> > ro automatically which makes eject button work as expected for all media (see
> > the changelog for why userspace should be ok with this change).
> 
> Pulled. However, these are kind of odd.
> 
> For trying _remount_ something read-only, isofs returns the logical
> EROFS error code.
> 
> But for trying to mount it in the first place, it returns EACCES,
> which sounds insane. It's not a permission problem - no amount of
> permissions will ever make it work.
> 
> UDF always does EACCES, regardless of mount/remount.
> 
> Is there some fundamental reason for the insane error code? Does user
> space do the wrong thing if we were to just always return "EROFS"
> which makes much more sense?
  So I personally like EROFS more as well. However blkdev_get_by_path()
(which is what mount(2) uses) returns EACCES if the device is read-only and
FMODE_WRITE was requested. Also the manpage for mount(2) talks about
EACCES when RW mount of read-only device was requested and doesn't mention
EROFS at all.

Now mount(8) handles both EROFS and EACCES the same way but I wanted to
stay on the safer side in case someone uses mount(2) directly so I used
more common EACCES.

I can create a separate patch changing all EACCES return values in this
area to EROFS but I'm not sure it is worth the possible hassle with
userspace...

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR