First allocate the necessary eraseblocks, then the optional ones.
Otherwise it allocates all PEBs for bad EB handling, and fails
on then following EBA LEB allocation.
Reported-by: NAdrian Hunter <ext-adrian.hunter@nokia.com>
Signed-off-by: NArtem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>

Slab constructors currently have a flags parameter that is never used.  And
the order of the arguments is opposite to other slab functions.  The object
pointer is placed before the kmem_cache pointer.

Convert

        ctor(void *object, struct kmem_cache *s, unsigned long flags)

to

        ctor(struct kmem_cache *s, void *object)

throughout the kernel

[akpm@linux-foundation.org: coupla fixes]
Signed-off-by: NChristoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

Fix the following warning:

drivers/mtd/ubi/eba.c: In function 'ubi_eba_init_scan':
drivers/mtd/ubi/eba.c:1116: warning: 'err' may be used uninitialized in this function
Pointed-to-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NArtem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>

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>

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>

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>

Slab destructors were no longer supported after Christoph's
c59def9f change. They've been
BUGs for both slab and slub, and slob never supported them
either.

This rips out support for the dtor pointer from kmem_cache_create()
completely and fixes up every single callsite in the kernel (there were
about 224, not including the slab allocator definitions themselves,
or the documentation references).
Signed-off-by: NPaul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>

atomic_leb_change() is only allowed for dynamic volumes, so set
the volume type correctly.
Signed-off-by: NArtem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>

Do not call 'ubi_wl_put_peb()' if the LEB was unmapped.
Reported-by: NGabor Loki <loki@inf.u-szeged.hu>
Signed-off-by: NArtem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>

Kill UBI's homegrown endianess handling and replace it with
the standard kernel endianess handling.
Signed-off-by: NChristoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: NArtem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>

UBI allocates temporary buffers of PEB size, which may be 256KiB.
Use vmalloc instead of kmalloc for such big temporary buffers.
Signed-off-by: NArtem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@nokia.com>

Mark variables in drivers/* with uninitialized_var() if such a warning
appears, and analysis proves that the var is initialized properly on all
paths it is used.
Signed-off-by: NJeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>

Signed-off-by: NJeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>

SLAB_CTOR_CONSTRUCTOR is always specified. No point in checking it.
Signed-off-by: NChristoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Cc: Steven French <sfrench@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Michael Halcrow <mhalcrow@us.ibm.com>
Cc: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>
Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Cc: Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@redhat.com>
Cc: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc: Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cantab.net>
Cc: Mark Fasheh <mark.fasheh@oracle.com>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@ucw.cz>
Cc: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

I have never seen a use of SLAB_DEBUG_INITIAL.  It is only supported by
SLAB.

I think its purpose was to have a callback after an object has been freed
to verify that the state is the constructor state again?  The callback is
performed before each freeing of an object.

I would think that it is much easier to check the object state manually
before the free.  That also places the check near the code object
manipulation of the object.

Also the SLAB_DEBUG_INITIAL callback is only performed if the kernel was
compiled with SLAB debugging on.  If there would be code in a constructor
handling SLAB_DEBUG_INITIAL then it would have to be conditional on
SLAB_DEBUG otherwise it would just be dead code.  But there is no such code
in the kernel.  I think SLUB_DEBUG_INITIAL is too problematic to make real
use of, difficult to understand and there are easier ways to accomplish the
same effect (i.e.  add debug code before kfree).

There is a related flag SLAB_CTOR_VERIFY that is frequently checked to be
clear in fs inode caches.  Remove the pointless checks (they would even be
pointless without removeal of SLAB_DEBUG_INITIAL) from the fs constructors.

This is the last slab flag that SLUB did not support.  Remove the check for
unimplemented flags from SLUB.
Signed-off-by: NChristoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

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>