2.6.39 Kernel Changes for FileSystem, get_sb removed

PATCH Abhijit Pawar 3 participants 7 messages Sep 20, 2011 Documentation

Share & tools

Abhijit Pawar

author

2011-09-20 11:44 UTC #0 lore raw

Hi list,
It seems that the support for get_sb function is removed from kernel 2.6.39 onwards. My code which is working till 2.6.38 series is failing with new kernels.

I tried finding out but there isnt anything mentioned. So if this function itself is removed then how kernel is going to find out the superblock and use it?

Are we supposed to use the mount function provided? This is what i got from one of the kernel patch email.

+[mandatory]
+ ->get_sb() is gone. Switch to use of ->mount(). Typically it's just
+a matter of switching from calling get_sb_... to mount_... and changing the +function type. If you were doing it manually, just switch from setting ->mnt_root +to some pointer to returning that pointer. On errors return ERR_PTR(...).

Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt +0 -0

It looks like there are other changes related to Pages are also done.

Regards,
Abhijit Pawar
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20110920/a9309d82/attachment.html

Abhijit Pawar

author

2011-09-20 12:13 UTC #1 lore raw

Quoted 19 lines · Abhijit Pawar

Hi list,
It seems that the support for get_sb function is removed from kernel 2.6.39 onwards. My code which is working till 2.6.38 series is failing with new kernels.
I tried finding out but there isnt anything mentioned. So if this function itself is removed then how kernel is going to find out the superblock and use it?
Are we supposed to use the mount function provided? This is what i got from one of the kernel patch email.
+[mandatory]
(quoted diff) +4 -0
+	->get_sb() is gone.  Switch to use of ->mount().  Typically it's just
+a matter of switching from calling get_sb_... to mount_... and changing the
+function type.  If you were doing it manually, just switch from setting ->mnt_root
+to some pointer to returning that pointer.  On errors return ERR_PTR(...).
Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt +0 -0

Quoted 5 lines

It looks like there are other changes related to Pages are also done.
Regards,
Abhijit Pawar

I have modified the code to use the mount function and its working correctly. There is one more change I noticed for struct
address_space_operations: The sync_page is removed.

The code is working now.

Regards,
Abhijit Pawar

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20110920/7e0f24d1/attachment.html

rohan puri

2011-09-20 12:20 UTC #2 lore raw

In reply to Abhijit Pawar

Quoted 23 lines · Abhijit Pawar

Hi list,
It seems that the support for get_sb function is removed from kernel 2.6.39 onwards. My code which is working till 2.6.38 series is failing with new kernels.
I tried finding out but there isnt anything mentioned. So if this function itself is removed then how kernel is going to find out the superblock and use it?
Are we supposed to use the mount function provided? This is what i got from one of the kernel patch email.
+[mandatory]
(quoted diff) +4 -0
+	->get_sb() is gone.  Switch to use of ->mount().  Typically it's just
+a matter of switching from calling get_sb_... to mount_... and changing the
+function type.  If you were doing it manually, just switch from setting ->mnt_root
+to some pointer to returning that pointer.  On errors return ERR_PTR(...).
Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt +0 -0
It looks like there are other changes related to Pages are also done.

Quoted 8 lines

Regards,
Abhijit Pawar
_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies at kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Hi Abhijit,

Yes you have to make use of mount function pointer in the struct file_system_type.

NOTE : - change is only in one parameter of type struct vfsmount which is basically removed from this function pointer.

Regards,
Rohan Puri
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20110920/1275d3f9/attachment.html

Abhijit Pawar

author

2011-09-20 12:24 UTC #3 lore raw

Quoted 40 lines · rohan puri

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Abhijit Pawar <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi list,
It seems that the support for get_sb function is removed from kernel 2.6.39 onwards. My code which is working till 2.6.38 series is failing with new kernels.
I tried finding out but there isnt anything mentioned. So if this function itself is removed then how kernel is going to find out the superblock and use it?
Are we supposed to use the mount function provided? This is what i got from one of the kernel patch email.
+[mandatory]
+ ->get_sb() is gone. Switch to use of ->mount(). Typically it's just
+a matter of switching from calling get_sb_... to mount_... and changing the +function type. If you were doing it manually, just switch from setting ->mnt_root +to some pointer to returning that pointer. On errors return ERR_PTR(...). diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt b/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt
It looks like there are other changes related to Pages are also done.
Regards,
Abhijit Pawar
_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies at kernelnewbies.org
<mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
Hi Abhijit,

Quoted 9 lines

Yes you have to make use of mount function pointer in the struct file_system_type.
NOTE : - change is only in one parameter of type struct vfsmount which is basically removed from this function pointer.
Regards,
Rohan Puri

Thanks Rohan. Yes, i have made the changes and things are looking good. struct address_space_operation's sync_page is also removed.

rohan puri

2011-09-20 12:41 UTC #4 lore raw

Quoted 46 lines · Abhijit Pawar

On 09/20/2011 05:50 PM, rohan puri wrote:
Quoted 23 lines · Abhijit Pawar
Hi list,
It seems that the support for get_sb function is removed from kernel 2.6.39 onwards. My code which is working till 2.6.38 series is failing with new kernels.
I tried finding out but there isnt anything mentioned. So if this function itself is removed then how kernel is going to find out the superblock and use it?
Are we supposed to use the mount function provided? This is what i got from one of the kernel patch email.
+[mandatory]
(quoted diff) +4 -0
+	->get_sb() is gone.  Switch to use of ->mount().  Typically it's just
+a matter of switching from calling get_sb_... to mount_... and changing the
+function type.  If you were doing it manually, just switch from setting ->mnt_root
+to some pointer to returning that pointer.  On errors return ERR_PTR(...).
Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt +0 -0
It looks like there are other changes related to Pages are also done.
Quoted 8 lines
Regards,
Abhijit Pawar
_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies at kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
Hi Abhijit,
Yes you have to make use of mount function pointer in the struct file_system_type.
NOTE : - change is only in one parameter of type struct vfsmount which is basically removed from this function pointer.

Quoted 9 lines

Regards,
Rohan Puri
Thanks Rohan. Yes, i have made the changes and things are looking good.
struct address_space_operation's sync_page is also removed.
Regards,
Abhijit Pawar

Welcome :)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20110920/c37b003e/attachment.html

kashish bhatia

2011-09-20 13:16 UTC #5 lore raw

In reply to Abhijit Pawar

Hi Abhijit,

Quoted 6 lines · Abhijit Pawar

Hi list,
It seems that the support for get_sb function is removed from kernel 2.6.39 onwards. My code which is working till 2.6.38 series is failing with new kernels.

The function "get_sb()" is still present in security/inode.c in kernel
2.6.39. Only the function pointer of get_sb() has been removed from struct file_system_type in /include/linux/fs.h.

I tried finding out but there isnt anything mentioned. So if this function

Quoted 7 lines

itself is removed then how kernel is going to find out the superblock and use it?
Are we supposed to use the mount function provided? This is what i got from one of the kernel patch email.

Yes , you are supposed to use mount function.
visit the following link :
http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v2.6.39/security/inode.c#L144<http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v2.6.39/security/inode.c%23L144>

+[mandatory]

Quoted 19 lines

(quoted diff) +4 -0
+	->get_sb() is gone.  Switch to use of ->mount().  Typically it's just
+a matter of switching from calling get_sb_... to mount_... and changing the
+function type.  If you were doing it manually, just switch from setting ->mnt_root
+to some pointer to returning that pointer.  On errors return ERR_PTR(...).
Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt +0 -0
It looks like there are other changes related to Pages are also done.
Regards,
Abhijit Pawar
_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies at kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

Signature · 5 lines

Regards,
Kashish
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20110920/6a9c1eb6/attachment.html

rohan puri

2011-09-20 13:24 UTC #6 lore raw

Quoted 4 lines · kashish bhatia

Hi Abhijit,
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Abhijit Pawar <[email protected]>wrote:

Quoted 9 lines

Quoted 6 lines
Hi list,
It seems that the support for get_sb function is removed from kernel 2.6.39 onwards. My code which is working till 2.6.38 series is failing with new kernels.
The function "get_sb()" is still present in security/inode.c in kernel
2.6.39. Only the function pointer of get_sb() has been removed from

The name they have kept is the same in security/inode.c but you can compare the prototype to earlier kernel versions. They will be different. Also its assigned to mount function pointer field of struct file_system_type.

Quoted 41 lines

struct file_system_type in /include/linux/fs.h.
I tried finding out but there isnt anything mentioned. So if this function
Quoted 7 lines
itself is removed then how kernel is going to find out the superblock and use it?
Are we supposed to use the mount function provided? This is what i got from one of the kernel patch email.
Yes , you are supposed to use mount function.
visit the following link :
http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v2.6.39/security/inode.c#L144<http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v2.6.39/security/inode.c%23L144>
+[mandatory]
Quoted 10 lines
(quoted diff) +4 -0
+	->get_sb() is gone.  Switch to use of ->mount().  Typically it's just
+a matter of switching from calling get_sb_... to mount_... and changing the
+function type.  If you were doing it manually, just switch from setting ->mnt_root
+to some pointer to returning that pointer.  On errors return ERR_PTR(...).
Documentation/filesystems/vfs.txt +0 -0
It looks like there are other changes related to Pages are also done.
Quoted 9 lines
Regards,
Abhijit Pawar
_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies at kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
--
Regards,
Kashish

Quoted 6 lines

_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies at kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies