exfat: fix
ext4: Add support for FIDTRIM, a best-effort ioctl for deep discard trim

* What
This provides an interface for issuing an FITRIM which uses the
secure discard instead of just a discard.
Only the eMMC command is "secure", and not how the FS uses it:
due to the fact that the FS might reassign a region somewhere else,
the original deleted data will not be affected by the "trim" which only
handles un-used regions.
So we'll just call it "deep discard", and note that this is a
"best effort" cleanup.

* Why
Once in a while, We want to be able to cleanup most of the unused blocks
after erasing a bunch of files.
We don't want to constantly secure-discard via a mount option.

From an eMMC spec perspective, it tells the device to really get rid of
all the data for the specified blocks and not just put them back into the
pool of free ones (unlike the normal TRIM). The eMMC spec says the
secure trim handling must make sure the data (and metadata) is not available
anymore. A simple TRIM doesn't clear the data, it just puts blocks in the
free pool.
JEDEC Standard No. 84-A441
  7.6.9 Secure Erase
  7.6.10 Secure Trim

From an FS perspective, it is acceptable to leave some data behind.
 - directory entries related to deleted files
 - databases entries related to deleted files
 - small-file data stored in inode extents
 - blocks held by the FS waiting to be re-used (mitigated by sync).
 - blocks reassigned by the FS prior to FIDTRIM.

Signed-off-by: Geremy Condra <gcondra@google.com>
Signed-off-by: JP Abgrall <jpa@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
ext4: remove unused ac_ex_scanned

When looking at a bug report with:

> kernel: EXT4-fs: 0 scanned, 0 found

I thought wow, 0 scanned, that's odd?  But it's not odd; it's printing
a variable that is initialized to 0 and never touched again.

It's never been used since the original merge, so I don't really even
know what the original intent was, either.

If anyone knows how to hook it up, speak now via patch, otherwise just
yank it so it's not making a confusing situation more confusing in
kernel logs.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: TomorrowLandAce <joaolrpaulo@gmail.com>
ext4: address a benign compiler warning

When !defined(CONFIG_EXT4_DEBUG), mb_debug() should be defined as a
no_printk() statement instead of an empty statement in order to suppress
the following compiler warning:

fs/ext4/mballoc.c: In function ‘ext4_mb_cleanup_pa’:
fs/ext4/mballoc.c:2659:47: warning: suggest braces around empty body in an ‘if’ statement [-Wempty-body]
   mb_debug(1, "mballoc: %u PAs left\n", count);

Signed-off-by: Patrick Palka <patrick@parcs.ath.cx>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: TomorrowLandAce <joaolrpaulo@gmail.com>
ext4: remove unreachable code in ext4_can_extents_be_merged()

Commit ec22ba8e ("ext4: disable merging of uninitialized extents")
ensured that if either extent under consideration is uninit, we
decline to merge, and immediately return.

But right after that test, we test again for an uninit
extent; we can never hit this.  So just remove the impossible
test and associated variable.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Reviewed-by: Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@taobao.com>
Signed-off-by: TomorrowLandAce <joaolrpaulo@gmail.com>
ext4: remove unreachable code after ext4_can_extents_be_merged()

Commit ec22ba8e ("ext4: disable merging of uninitialized extents")
ensured that if either extent under consideration is uninit, we
decline to merge, and ext4_can_extents_be_merged() returns false.

So there is no need for the caller to then test whether the
extent under consideration is unitialized; if it were, we
wouldn't have gotten that far.

The comments were also inaccurate; ext4_can_extents_be_merged()
no longer XORs the states, it fails if *either* is uninit.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Reviewed-by: Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@taobao.com>
Signed-off-by: Chet Kener <Cl3Kener@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: TomorrowLandAce <joaolrpaulo@gmail.com>

Conflicts:
	fs/ext4/extents.c

Signed-off-by: TomorrowLandAce <joaolrpaulo@gmail.com>
ext4: optimize test_root()

The test_root() function could potentially loop forever due to
overflow issues.  So rewrite test_root() to avoid this issue; as a
bonus, it is 38% faster when benchmarked via a test loop:

int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
	int  i;

	for (i = 0; i < 1 << 24; i++) {
		if (test_root(i, 7))
			printf("%d\n", i);
	}
}

Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: TomorrowLandAce <joaolrpaulo@gmail.com>
ext4: collapse a single extent tree block into the inode if possible

If an inode has more than 4 extents, but then later some of the
extents are merged together, we can optimize the file system by moving
the extents up into the inode, and discarding the extent tree block.
This is important, because if there are a large number of inodes with
an external extent tree blocks where the contents could fit in the
inode, this can significantly increase the fsck time of the file
system.

Google-Bug-Id: 6801242

Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Joao Paulo <joaolrpaulo@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: TomorrowLandAce <joaolrpaulo@gmail.com>
ext4: don't load the block bitmap for block groups which have no space

Add a short circuit check to ext4_mb_group_group() so that we don't
bother to load the block bitmap for a block group which does not have
any space available.  (Or which does not have enough space until we
are in desperation mode, i.e., when cr == 3.)

Resolves-bug: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45741
Reported-by: mirek@me.com
Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Pranav Vashi <neobuddy89@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Joao Paulo <joaolrpaulo@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: TomorrowLandAce <joaolrpaulo@gmail.com>