--- On Sun, 4/9/11, Pavel Ivanov <paivanof@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 7:35 PM, > >> So these 2 pointers are exactly what causing the > trouble. > > > > This is interesting... so it would appear that > hfsplus_read_wrapper() isn't working correctly, but enough > of correct information to pass checks. I just re-read your > e-mail and your device has a logical block size of 4096 > bytes, whereas most of the hfsplus code uses a block size of > 512... you will need to look into hfsplus_submit_bio(), > which is in the same file wrapper.c. > > I've looked into the code myself a little and here's what I > see. > hfsplus_read_wrapper() calls to hfsplus_submit_bio() twice > to fill > sbi->s_vhdr and sbi->s_backup_vhdr. And according to > parameters they > are filled with pointers into sbi->s_vhdr_buf and > sbi->s_backup_vhdr_buf respectively. It's done with the > following code > at fs/hfsplus/wrapper.c:79: > > if (!(rw & WRITE) && data) > *data = (u8 *)buf + > offset; > > So s_vhdr and s_backup_vhdr shouldn't be freed, s_vhdr_buf > and > s_backup_vhdr_buf should be freed instead. And indeed > changing in > hfsplus_fill_super() > > kfree(sbi->s_vhdr); > kfree(sbi->s_backup_vhdr); > > to > > kfree(sbi->s_vhdr_buf); > kfree(sbi->s_backup_vhdr_buf); > > fixes BUG reports from SLUB. The code around there is a bit too dense, and both of the *_buf are recent introductions (and temp values, I think) as is hfsplus_submit_bio() itself, around the 2.6.39/3.0 time frame. I think the intention is to fill s_vhdr/s_backup_vhdr via mulitple fetches using *_buf as temp buffer. > Now, the problem with "too large" error is trickier. > According to this message > > >> [ 92.549197] hfs: filesystem size too large > blksz_shift=14, total_blocks=486494 > > HFS thinks that my iPod has block size of 16 KiB. But > generic_check_addressable() decides that everything with > blocks larger > than PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT (i.e. 4 KiB on my system) cannot be > addressable > and thus filesystem cannot be mounted. I guess it wasn't > supposed to > be that way. Is hfsplus_read_wrapper() wrong in determining > block size > or all iPods where this was tested actually had block size > 4 KiB or > less? Your logical sector size is 4k according to dmesg and hfs block size is 512 so that 16KiB is a bit dodgy. > > It is going to be difficult to do anything without the > actual device and 8GB is too large to be send around. > Assuming it is mostly music/media and there isn't too much > stuff which is too confident/private, can I ask you to send > me say, the first few MB of the disk? > > I'll send it in a separate email bypassing lists. Thanks - I got them now. It will take a while to find my way around though... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
