This warning is useful for catching the easy mistake of missing the
keyword static on functions intended to be internal-only.
Missing the static keyword risks symbol polution and misses potential
compiler optimizations.
This is an interesting warning, while useful for libraries such as
littlefs, it's perfectly valid C to not predeclare all functions, and
common in final application binaries.
Relatedly, this warning is re-disabled for the test/bench runner. There
may be a better way to organize the CFLAGS, maybe into separate
LIB/RUNNER CFLAGS, but I'll leave this to future work if our CFLAGS grow
more complicated.
This was motivated by non-static internal-only functions leaking into a
release. Found and fixed by DvdGiessen.
The idea is in the future this function may be extended to support other
block janitorial work. In such a case calling this lfs_fs_gc provides a
more general name that can include other operations.
This is currently just wishful thinking, however.
- Test that the code actually runs.
- Test that lfs_fs_findfreeblocks does not break block allocations.
- Test that lfs_fs_findfreeblocks does not error when no space is
available, it should only errors when the block is actually needed.
The initial implementation for this was provided by kaetemi, originally
as a mount flag. However, it has been modified here to be self-contained
in an explicit runtime function that can be called after mount.
The reasons for an explicit function:
1. lfs_mount stays a strictly readonly operation, and avoids pulling in
all of the write machinery.
2. filesystem-wide operations such as lfs_fs_grow can be a bit risky,
and irreversable. The action of growing the filesystem should be very
intentional.
---
One concern with this change is that this will be the first function
that changes metadata in the superblock. This might break tools that
expect the first valid superblock entry to contain the most recent
metadata, since only the last superblock in the superblock chain will
contain the updated metadata.
In separating the configuration of littlefs from the physical geometry
of the underlying device, we can no longer rely solely on lfs_config to
contain all of the information necessary for the simulated block devices
we use for testing.
This adds a new lfs_*bd_config struct for each of the block devices, and
new erase_size/erase_count fields. The erase_* name was chosen since
these reflect the (simulated) physical erase size and count of
erase-sized blocks, unlike the block_* variants which represent logical
block sizes used for littlefs's bookkeeping.
It may be worth adopting erase_size/erase_count in littlefs's config at
some point in the future, but at the moment doesn't seem necessary.
Changing the lfs_bd_config structs to be required is probably a good
idea anyways, as it moves us more towards separating the bds from
littlefs. Though we can't quite get rid of the lfs_config parameter
because of the block-device API in lfs_config. Eventually it would be
nice to get rid of it, but that would require API breakage.
This can't actually happen in the current state of the littlefs GitHub
repo, but could in theory cause problems if CI is enabled on a fork.
Found while enabling GitHub Actions on littlefs-fuse.
The code-cost wasn't that bad: 16556 B -> 16754 B (+1.2%)
But moving write support of older versions behind a compile-time flag
allows us to be a bit more liberal with what gets added to support older
versions, since the cost won't hit most users.
The intention is to help interop with older minor versions of littlefs.
Unfortunately, since lfs2.0 drivers cannot mount lfs2.1 images, there are
situations where it would be useful to write to write strictly lfs2.0
compatible images. The solution here adds a "disk_version" configuration
option which determines the behavior of lfs2.1 dependent features.
Normally you would expect this to only change write behavior. But since the
main change in lfs2.1 increased validation of erased data, we also need to
skip this extra validation (fcrc) or see terrible slowdowns when writing.
In terms of ease-of-use, a user familiar with other filesystems expects
block_usage in fsinfo. But in terms of practicality, block_usage can be
expensive to find in littlefs, so if it's not needed in the resulting
fsinfo, that operation is wasteful.
It's not clear to me what the best course of action is, but since
block_usage can always be added to fsinfo later, but not removed without
breaking backwards compatibility, I'm leaving this out for now.
Block usage can still be found by explicitly calling lfs_fs_size.
ChaN's FAT implementation definitely deserves a mention here, since it
was one of the first open-source microcontroller-oriented filesystem
implementations that I'm aware of, and has a lot of good ideas at the
implementation level.
Honestly I didn't realize this wasn't already linked to from here. If
you're using FAT on a microcontroller, it's most likely this library.
Carles Cufí