1. 04 3月, 2008 1 次提交
  2. 25 1月, 2008 5 次提交
    • A
      e653879c
    • A
      UBI: simplify internal interfaces · 1b68d0ee
      Artem Bityutskiy 提交于
      Instead of passing vol_id to all functions and then find
      struct ubi_volume, pass struct ubi_volume pointer.
      Signed-off-by: NArtem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
      1b68d0ee
    • A
      UBI: add auto-resize feature · 4ccf8cff
      Artem Bityutskiy 提交于
      The problem: NAND flashes have different amount of initial bad physical
      eraseblocks (marked as bad by the manufacturer). For example, for 256MiB
      Samsung OneNAND flash there might be from 0 to 40 bad initial eraseblocks,
      which is about 2%. When UBI is used as the base system, one needs to know
      the exact amount of good physical eraseblocks, because this number is
      needed to create the UBI image which is put to the devices during
      production. But this number is not know, which forces us to use the
      minimum number of good physical eraseblocks. And UBI additionally
      reserves some percentage of physical eraseblocks for bad block handling
      (default is 1%), so we have 1-3% of PEBs reserved at the end, depending
      on the amount of initial bad PEBs. But it is desired to always have
      1% (or more, depending on the configuration).
      
      Solution: this patch adds an "auto-resize" flag to the volume table.
      The volume which has the "auto-resize" flag will automatically be re-sized
      (enlarged) on the first UBI initialization. UBI clears the flag when
      the volume is re-sized. Only one volume may have the "auto-resize" flag.
      
      So, the production UBI image may have one volume with "auto-resize"
      flag set, and its size is automatically adjusted on the first boot
      of the device.
      Signed-off-by: NArtem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
      4ccf8cff
    • A
      UBI: use bit-fields · 896c0c06
      Artem Bityutskiy 提交于
      Save 12 bytes of RAM per volume by using bit-fields instead of integers.
      Signed-off-by: NArtem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
      896c0c06
    • A
      UBI: get rid of ubi_ltree_slab · b9a06623
      Artem Bityutskiy 提交于
      This slab cache is not really needed since the number of objects
      is low and the constructor does not make much sense because we
      allocate oblects when doint I/O, which is way slower then allocation.
      Suggested-by: NArnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
      Signed-off-by: NArtem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
      b9a06623
  3. 27 12月, 2007 15 次提交
  4. 14 10月, 2007 3 次提交
    • A
      UBI: fix atomic LEB change problems · e8823bd6
      Artem Bityutskiy 提交于
      When the UBI device is nearly full, i.e. all LEBs are mapped, we have
      only one spare LEB left - the one we reserved for WL purposes. Well,
      I do not count the LEBs which were reserved for bad PEB handling -
      suppose NOR flash for simplicity. If an "atomic LEB change operation"
      is run, and the WL unit is moving a LEB, we have no spare LEBs to
      finish the operation and fail, which is not good. Moreover, if there
      are 2 or more simultanious "atomic LEB change" requests, only one of
      them has chances to succeed, the other will fail with -ENOSPC. Not
      good either.
      
      This patch does 2 things:
      1. Reserves one PEB for the "atomic LEB change" operation.
      2. Serealize the operations so that only on of them may run
         at a time (by means of a mutex).
      Pointed-to-by: NBrijesh Singh <brijesh.s.singh@gmail.com>
      Signed-off-by: NArtem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
      e8823bd6
    • A
      UBI: do not use vmalloc on I/O path · e88d6e10
      Artem Bityutskiy 提交于
      Similar reason as in case of the previous patch: it causes
      deadlocks if a filesystem with writeback support works on top
      of UBI. So pre-allocate needed buffers when attaching MTD device.
      We also need mutexes to protect the buffers, but they do not
      cause much contantion because they are used in recovery, torture,
      and WL copy routines, which are called seldom.
      Signed-off-by: NArtem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
      e88d6e10
    • A
      UBI: allocate memory with GFP_NOFS · 33818bbb
      Artem Bityutskiy 提交于
      Use GFP_NOFS flag when allocating memory on I/O path, because otherwise
      we may deadlock the filesystem which works on top of us. We observed
      the deadlocks with UBIFS. Example:
      
      VFS->FS lock a lock->UBI->kmalloc()->VFS writeback->FS locks the same
      lock again.
      Signed-off-by: NArtem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>
      33818bbb
  5. 18 7月, 2007 2 次提交
  6. 27 4月, 2007 1 次提交
    • A
      UBI: Unsorted Block Images · 801c135c
      Artem B. Bityutskiy 提交于
      UBI (Latin: "where?") manages multiple logical volumes on a single
      flash device, specifically supporting NAND flash devices. UBI provides
      a flexible partitioning concept which still allows for wear-levelling
      across the whole flash device.
      
      In a sense, UBI may be compared to the Logical Volume Manager
      (LVM). Whereas LVM maps logical sector numbers to physical HDD sector
      numbers, UBI maps logical eraseblocks to physical eraseblocks.
      
      More information may be found at
      http://www.linux-mtd.infradead.org/doc/ubi.html
      
      Partitioning/Re-partitioning
      
        An UBI volume occupies a certain number of erase blocks. This is
        limited by a configured maximum volume size, which could also be
        viewed as the partition size. Each individual UBI volume's size can
        be changed independently of the other UBI volumes, provided that the
        sum of all volume sizes doesn't exceed a certain limit.
      
        UBI supports dynamic volumes and static volumes. Static volumes are
        read-only and their contents are protected by CRC check sums.
      
      Bad eraseblocks handling
      
        UBI transparently handles bad eraseblocks. When a physical
        eraseblock becomes bad, it is substituted by a good physical
        eraseblock, and the user does not even notice this.
      
      Scrubbing
      
        On a NAND flash bit flips can occur on any write operation,
        sometimes also on read. If bit flips persist on the device, at first
        they can still be corrected by ECC, but once they accumulate,
        correction will become impossible. Thus it is best to actively scrub
        the affected eraseblock, by first copying it to a free eraseblock
        and then erasing the original. The UBI layer performs this type of
        scrubbing under the covers, transparently to the UBI volume users.
      
      Erase Counts
      
        UBI maintains an erase count header per eraseblock. This frees
        higher-level layers (like file systems) from doing this and allows
        for centralized erase count management instead. The erase counts are
        used by the wear-levelling algorithm in the UBI layer. The algorithm
        itself is exchangeable.
      
      Booting from NAND
      
        For booting directly from NAND flash the hardware must at least be
        capable of fetching and executing a small portion of the NAND
        flash. Some NAND flash controllers have this kind of support. They
        usually limit the window to a few kilobytes in erase block 0. This
        "initial program loader" (IPL) must then contain sufficient logic to
        load and execute the next boot phase.
      
        Due to bad eraseblocks, which may be randomly scattered over the
        flash device, it is problematic to store the "secondary program
        loader" (SPL) statically. Also, due to bit-flips it may become
        corrupted over time. UBI allows to solve this problem gracefully by
        storing the SPL in a small static UBI volume.
      
      UBI volumes vs. static partitions
      
        UBI volumes are still very similar to static MTD partitions:
      
          * both consist of eraseblocks (logical eraseblocks in case of UBI
            volumes, and physical eraseblocks in case of static partitions;
          * both support three basic operations - read, write, erase.
      
        But UBI volumes have the following advantages over traditional
        static MTD partitions:
      
          * there are no eraseblock wear-leveling constraints in case of UBI
            volumes, so the user should not care about this;
          * there are no bit-flips and bad eraseblocks in case of UBI volumes.
      
        So, UBI volumes may be considered as flash devices with relaxed
        restrictions.
      
      Where can it be found?
      
        Documentation, kernel code and applications can be found in the MTD
        gits.
      
      What are the applications for?
      
        The applications help to create binary flash images for two purposes: pfi
        files (partial flash images) for in-system update of UBI volumes, and plain
        binary images, with or without OOB data in case of NAND, for a manufacturing
        step. Furthermore some tools are/and will be created that allow flash content
        analysis after a system has crashed..
      
      Who did UBI?
      
        The original ideas, where UBI is based on, were developed by Andreas
        Arnez, Frank Haverkamp and Thomas Gleixner. Josh W. Boyer and some others
        were involved too. The implementation of the kernel layer was done by Artem
        B. Bityutskiy. The user-space applications and tools were written by Oliver
        Lohmann with contributions from Frank Haverkamp, Andreas Arnez, and Artem.
        Joern Engel contributed a patch which modifies JFFS2 so that it can be run on
        a UBI volume. Thomas Gleixner did modifications to the NAND layer. Alexander
        Schmidt made some testing work as well as core functionality improvements.
      Signed-off-by: NArtem B. Bityutskiy <dedekind@linutronix.de>
      Signed-off-by: NFrank Haverkamp <haver@vnet.ibm.com>
      801c135c