* Re: JFFS2 list_dirty corruption
2002-02-20 20:10 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2002-02-20 23:55 ` Adam Wozniak
2002-02-20 23:58 ` Adam Wozniak
2002-02-21 8:59 ` David Woodhouse
2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Adam Wozniak @ 2002-02-20 23:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gleixner; +Cc: David Woodhouse, linux-mtd, jffs-dev
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, 20. February 2002 20:41, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > While hacking on JFFS2 for NAND I found a possibility, where scan_medium
> > corrupts list_dirty.
> This patch resolves the problem:
>
> --- org/fs/jffs2/scan.c
> +++ work/fs/jffs2/scan.c
> @@ -128,9 +128,15 @@
> (!c->nextblock || c->nextblock->free_size <
> jeb->free_size)) {
> /* Better candidate for the next writes to
> go to */
> if (c->nextblock)
> + /* We must delete, because mark_node_obsolete
> + could have added this block to dirty_list already */
> + list_del(&c->nextblock->list);
> list_add(&c->nextblock->list,
> &c->dirty_list);
> c->nextblock = jeb;
> } else {
> + /* We must delete, because mark_node_obsolete
> + could have added this block to dirty_list already */
> + list_del(&jeb->list);
> list_add(&jeb->list, &c->dirty_list);
> }
> } else {
>
> I put it into CVS too
Ummm. Applying that patch gives me a seg fault on boot.
--Adam
--
Adam Wozniak (KG6GZR) COM DEV Wireless - Digital and Software Systems
awozniak@comdev.cc 805 Aerovista Place, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
http://www.comdev.cc
Voice: (805) 544-1089 Fax: (805) 544-2055
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: JFFS2 list_dirty corruption
2002-02-20 20:10 ` Thomas Gleixner
2002-02-20 23:55 ` Adam Wozniak
@ 2002-02-20 23:58 ` Adam Wozniak
2002-02-21 0:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2002-02-21 8:59 ` David Woodhouse
2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Adam Wozniak @ 2002-02-20 23:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gleixner; +Cc: David Woodhouse, linux-mtd, jffs-dev
Ok, maybe this is a problem:
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, 20. February 2002 20:41, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > While hacking on JFFS2 for NAND I found a possibility, where scan_medium
> > corrupts list_dirty.
> This patch resolves the problem:
>
> --- org/fs/jffs2/scan.c
> +++ work/fs/jffs2/scan.c
> @@ -128,9 +128,15 @@
> (!c->nextblock || c->nextblock->free_size <
> jeb->free_size)) {
> /* Better candidate for the next writes to
> go to */
> if (c->nextblock)
UMMM open { here?
> + /* We must delete, because mark_node_obsolete
> + could have added this block to dirty_list already */
> + list_del(&c->nextblock->list);
and close } here?
> list_add(&c->nextblock->list,
> &c->dirty_list);
> c->nextblock = jeb;
> } else {
> + /* We must delete, because mark_node_obsolete
> + could have added this block to dirty_list already */
> + list_del(&jeb->list);
> list_add(&jeb->list, &c->dirty_list);
> }
> } else {
--
Adam Wozniak (KG6GZR) COM DEV Wireless - Digital and Software Systems
awozniak@comdev.cc 805 Aerovista Place, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
http://www.comdev.cc
Voice: (805) 544-1089 Fax: (805) 544-2055
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: JFFS2 list_dirty corruption
2002-02-20 23:58 ` Adam Wozniak
@ 2002-02-21 0:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2002-02-21 0:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Adam Wozniak; +Cc: David Woodhouse, linux-mtd, jffs-dev
On Thursday, 21. February 2002 00:58, Adam Wozniak wrote:
> Ok, maybe this is a problem:
>
Sorry, you're right. I should send such mails better in the morning.
It happened on the transcript from my NAND modified stuff.
Here is the correct patch:
--- mtd/fs/jffs2/scan.c 2002/01/09 13:25:58 1.57
+++ mtd/fs/jffs2/scan.c 2002/02/21 00:17:19
@@ -127,10 +127,17 @@
if (jeb->free_size > 2*sizeof(struct
jffs2_raw_inode) &&
(!c->nextblock || c->nextblock->free_size <
jeb->free_size)) {
/* Better candidate for the next writes to
go to */
- if (c->nextblock)
+ if (c->nextblock) {
+ /* We must delete, because mark_node_obsolete
+ could have added this block to dirty_list already */
+ list_del(&c->nextblock->list);
list_add(&c->nextblock->list,
&c->dirty_list);
+ }
c->nextblock = jeb;
} else {
+ /* We must delete, because mark_node_obsolete
+ could have added this block to dirty_list already */
+ list_del(&jeb->list);
list_add(&jeb->list, &c->dirty_list);
}
} else {
--
Thomas
P.S. David: The jffs2-nand-version is correct.
__________________________________________________
Thomas Gleixner, autronix automation GmbH
auf dem berg 3, d-88690 uhldingen-muehlhofen
fon: +49 7556 919891 , fax: +49 7556 919886
mail: gleixner@autronix.de, http://www.autronix.de
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: JFFS2 list_dirty corruption
2002-02-20 20:10 ` Thomas Gleixner
2002-02-20 23:55 ` Adam Wozniak
2002-02-20 23:58 ` Adam Wozniak
@ 2002-02-21 8:59 ` David Woodhouse
2002-02-21 9:19 ` Thomas Gleixner
2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: David Woodhouse @ 2002-02-21 8:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gleixner; +Cc: linux-mtd, jffs-dev
gleixner@autronix.de said:
> > While hacking on JFFS2 for NAND I found a possibility, where
> > scan_medium corrupts list_dirty.
> This patch resolves the problem:
That's OK, but I think it's cleaner if we prevent the mark_node_obsolete()
code from touching the lists in the first place. This way, we can also
prevent it from trying to physically mark them obsolete too - if that
didn't happen the first time, we shouldn't be doing it on mount.
This problem didn't turn up on NOR flash because we do mark the nodes
obsolete on the flash, so the mount code never had to bother with them.
Please could you confirm this also fixes the problem?
Index: include/linux/jffs2_fs_sb.h
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/mtd/include/linux/jffs2_fs_sb.h,v
retrieving revision 1.18
diff -u -p -r1.18 jffs2_fs_sb.h
--- include/linux/jffs2_fs_sb.h 2002/01/09 11:44:23 1.18
+++ include/linux/jffs2_fs_sb.h 2002/02/21 08:33:56
@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
#define INOCACHE_HASHSIZE 1
#define JFFS2_SB_FLAG_RO 1
+#define JFFS2_SB_FLAG_MOUNTING 2
/* A struct for the overall file system control. Pointers to
jffs2_sb_info structs are named `c' in the source code.
Index: fs/jffs2/build.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/mtd/fs/jffs2/build.c,v
retrieving revision 1.22
diff -u -p -r1.22 build.c
--- fs/jffs2/build.c 2002/01/09 16:30:57 1.22
+++ fs/jffs2/build.c 2002/02/21 08:33:56
@@ -293,6 +293,7 @@ int jffs2_do_mount_fs(struct jffs2_sb_in
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&c->bad_list);
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&c->bad_used_list);
c->highest_ino = 1;
+ c->flags |= JFFS2_SB_FLAG_MOUNTING;
if (jffs2_build_filesystem(c)) {
D1(printk(KERN_DEBUG "build_fs failed\n"));
@@ -301,5 +302,8 @@ int jffs2_do_mount_fs(struct jffs2_sb_in
kfree(c->blocks);
return -EIO;
}
+
+ c->flags &= ~JFFS2_SB_FLAG_MOUNTING;
+
return 0;
}
Index: fs/jffs2/nodemgmt.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/mtd/fs/jffs2/nodemgmt.c,v
retrieving revision 1.52
diff -u -p -r1.52 nodemgmt.c
--- fs/jffs2/nodemgmt.c 2002/01/19 23:16:41 1.52
+++ fs/jffs2/nodemgmt.c 2002/02/21 08:33:57
@@ -318,6 +318,15 @@ void jffs2_mark_node_obsolete(struct jff
ACCT_PARANOIA_CHECK(jeb);
+ if (c->flags & JFFS2_SB_FLAG_MOUNTING) {
+ /* Mount in progress. Don't muck about with the block
+ lists because they're not ready yet, and don't actually
+ obliterate nodes that look obsolete. If they weren't
+ marked obsolete on the flash at the time they _became_
+ obsolete, there was probably a reason for that. */
+ spin_unlock_bh(&c->erase_completion_lock);
+ return;
+ }
if (jeb == c->nextblock) {
D2(printk(KERN_DEBUG "Not moving nextblock 0x%08x to dirty/erase_pending list\n", jeb->offset));
} else if (jeb == c->gcblock) {
--
dwmw2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread* Re: JFFS2 list_dirty corruption
2002-02-21 8:59 ` David Woodhouse
@ 2002-02-21 9:19 ` Thomas Gleixner
2002-02-21 9:23 ` David Woodhouse
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2002-02-21 9:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Woodhouse, gleixner; +Cc: linux-mtd, jffs-dev
On Thursday, 21. February 2002 09:59, David Woodhouse wrote:
> Please could you confirm this also fixes the problem?
Yep, it does.
BTW: David, did you get my mail tonight? I had some strange notifications
from my mailsystem.
--
Thomas
__________________________________________________
Thomas Gleixner, autronix automation GmbH
auf dem berg 3, d-88690 uhldingen-muehlhofen
fon: +49 7556 919891 , fax: +49 7556 919886
mail: gleixner@autronix.de, http://www.autronix.de
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread