1. 27 6月, 2006 1 次提交
    • K
      [JFFS2][XATTR] using 'delete marker' for xdatum/xref deletion · c9f700f8
      KaiGai Kohei 提交于
      - When xdatum is removed, a new xdatum with 'delete marker' is
        written. (version==0xffffffff means 'delete marker')
      - When xref is removed, a new xref with 'delete marker' is written.
        (odd-numbered xseqno means 'delete marker')
      
      - delete_xattr_(datum/xref)_delay() are new deletion functions
        are added. We can only use them if we can detect the target
        obsolete xdatum/xref as a orphan or errir one.
        (e.g when inode deletion, or detecting crc error)
      
      [1/3] jffs2-xattr-v6-01-delete_marker.patch
      Signed-off-by: NKaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
      c9f700f8
  2. 19 5月, 2006 1 次提交
    • D
      [JFFS2] Support new device nodes · aef9ab47
      David Woodhouse 提交于
      Device node major/minor numbers are just stored in the payload of a single
      data node. Just extend that to 4 bytes and use new_encode_dev() for it.
      
      We only use the 4-byte format if we _need_ to, if !old_valid_dev(foo).
      This preserves backwards compatibility with older code as much as
      possible. If we do make devices with major or minor numbers above 255, and
      then mount the file system with the old code, it'll just read the first
      two bytes and get the numbers wrong. If it comes to garbage-collect it,
      it'll then write back those wrong numbers. But that's about the best we
      can expect.
      Signed-off-by: NDavid Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
      aef9ab47
  3. 17 5月, 2006 1 次提交
  4. 15 5月, 2006 1 次提交
    • D
      [JFFS2] Don't pack on-medium structures, because GCC emits crappy code · 3e68fbb5
      David Woodhouse 提交于
      If we use __attribute__((packed)), GCC will _also_ assume that the
      structures aren't sensibly aligned, and it'll emit code to cope with
      that instead of straight word load/save. This can be _very_ suboptimal
      on architectures like ARM.
      
      Ideally, we want an attribute which just tells GCC not to do any
      padding, without the alignment side-effects. In the absense of that,
      we'll just drop the 'packed' attribute and hope that everything stays as
      it was (which to be fair is fairly much what we expect). And add some
      paranoia checks in the initialisation code, which should be optimised
      away completely in the normal case.
      Signed-off-by: NDavid Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
      3e68fbb5
  5. 13 5月, 2006 1 次提交
    • K
      [JFFS2][XATTR] XATTR support on JFFS2 (version. 5) · aa98d7cf
      KaiGai Kohei 提交于
      This attached patches provide xattr support including POSIX-ACL and
      SELinux support on JFFS2 (version.5).
      
      There are some significant differences from previous version posted
      at last December.
      The biggest change is addition of EBS(Erase Block Summary) support.
      Currently, both kernel and usermode utility (sumtool) can recognize
      xattr nodes which have JFFS2_NODETYPE_XATTR/_XREF nodetype.
      
      In addition, some bugs are fixed.
      - A potential race condition was fixed.
      - Unexpected fail when updating a xattr by same name/value pair was fixed.
      - A bug when removing xattr name/value pair was fixed.
      
      The fundamental structures (such as using two new nodetypes and exclusion
      mechanism by rwsem) are unchanged. But most of implementation were reviewed
      and updated if necessary.
      Espacially, we had to change several internal implementations related to
      load_xattr_datum() to avoid a potential race condition.
      
      [1/2] xattr_on_jffs2.kernel.version-5.patch
      [2/2] xattr_on_jffs2.utils.version-5.patch
      Signed-off-by: NKaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>
      Signed-off-by: NDavid Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
      aa98d7cf
  6. 07 11月, 2005 5 次提交
  7. 17 4月, 2005 1 次提交
    • L
      Linux-2.6.12-rc2 · 1da177e4
      Linus Torvalds 提交于
      Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
      even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
      archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
      3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
      git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
      infrastructure for it.
      
      Let it rip!
      1da177e4