6.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Zhang Yi yi.zhang@huawei.com
commit 82e6381e23f1ea7a14f418215068aaa2ca046c84 upstream.
Various changes in the "ext4: better scalability for ext4 block allocation" patch series have resulted in kunit test failures, most notably in the test_new_blocks_simple and the test_mb_mark_used tests. The root cause of these failures is that various in-memory ext4 data structures were not getting initialized, and while previous versions of the functions exercised by the unit tests didn't use these structure members, this was arguably a test bug.
Since one of the patches in the block allocation scalability patches is a fix which is has a cc:stable tag, this commit also has a cc:stable tag.
CC: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250714130327.1830534-1-libaokun1@huawei.com Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20250725021550.3177573-1-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20250725021654.3188798-1-yi.zhang@huaweicloud.com Reported-by: Guenter Roeck linux@roeck-us.net Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ext4/b0635ad0-7ebf-4152-a69b-58e7e87d5085@roec... Tested-by: Guenter Roeck linux@roeck-us.net Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi yi.zhang@huawei.com Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o tytso@mit.edu Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org --- fs/ext4/mballoc-test.c | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc-test.c +++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc-test.c @@ -155,6 +155,7 @@ static struct super_block *mbt_ext4_allo bgl_lock_init(sbi->s_blockgroup_lock);
sbi->s_es = &fsb->es; + sbi->s_sb = sb; sb->s_fs_info = sbi;
up_write(&sb->s_umount); @@ -801,6 +802,10 @@ static void test_mb_mark_used(struct kun KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
grp->bb_free = EXT4_CLUSTERS_PER_GROUP(sb); + grp->bb_largest_free_order = -1; + grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_order = -1; + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&grp->bb_largest_free_order_node); + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_node); mbt_generate_test_ranges(sb, ranges, TEST_RANGE_COUNT); for (i = 0; i < TEST_RANGE_COUNT; i++) test_mb_mark_used_range(test, &e4b, ranges[i].start, @@ -873,6 +878,10 @@ static void test_mb_free_blocks(struct k ext4_unlock_group(sb, TEST_GOAL_GROUP);
grp->bb_free = 0; + grp->bb_largest_free_order = -1; + grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_order = -1; + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&grp->bb_largest_free_order_node); + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&grp->bb_avg_fragment_size_node); memset(bitmap, 0xff, sb->s_blocksize);
mbt_generate_test_ranges(sb, ranges, TEST_RANGE_COUNT);