Christopher Haster
5fa85583cd
Unfortunately block-level erased-state checksums (becksums) don't really
work as intended.
An invalid becksum _does_ signal that a prog has been attempted, but a
valid becksum does _not_ prove that a prog has _not_ been attempted.
Rbyd ecksums work, but only thanks to a combination of prioritizing
valid commits and the use of perturb bits to force erased-state changes.
It _is_ possible to end up with an ecksum collision, but only if you
1. lose power before completing a commit, and 2. end up with a
non-trivial crc32c collision. If this does happen, at the very least the
resulting commit will likely end up corrupted and thrown away later.
Block-level becksums, at least as originally designed, don't have either
of these protections. To make matters worse, the blocks these becksums
reference contain only raw user data. Write 0xffs into a file and you
will likely end up with a becksum collision!
This is a problem for a couple of reasons:
1. Progging multiple times to erased-state is likely to result in
corrupted data, though this is also likely to get caught with
validating writes.
Worst case, the resulting data looks valid, but with weakened data
retention.
2. Because becksums are stored in the copy-on-write metadata of the
file, attempting to open a file twice for writing (or more advanced
copy-on-write operations in the future) can lead to a situation where
a prog is attempted on _already committed_ data.
This is very bad and breaks copy-on-write guarantees.
---
So clearly becksums are not fit for purpose and should be dropped. What
can we replace them with?
The first option, implemented here, is RAM-tracked erased state. Give
each lfsr_file_t its own eblock/eoff fields to track the last known good
erased-state. And before each prog, clear eblock/eoff so we never
accidentally prog to the same erased-state twice.
It's interesting to note we don't currently clear eblock/eoff in all
file handles, this is ok only because we don't currently share
eblock/eoff across file handles. Each eblock/eoff is exclusive to the
lfsr_file_t and does not appear anywhere else in the system.
The main downside of this approach is that, well, the RAM-tracked
erase-state is only tracked in RAM. Block-level erased-state effectively
does not persist across reboots. I've considered adding some sort of
per-file erased-state tracking to the mdir that would need to be cleared
before use, but such a mechanism ends up quite complicated.
At the moment, I think the best second option is to put erased-state
tracking in the future-planned bmap. This would let you opt-in to
on-disk tracking of all erased-state in the system.
One nice thing about RAM-tracked erased-state is that it's not on disk,
so it's not really a compatibility concern and won't get in the way of
additional future erased-state tracking.
---
Benchmarking becksums vs RAM-tracking has been quite interesting. While
in theory becksums can track much more erased-state, it's quite unlikely
anything but the most recent erased-state actually ends up used. The end
result is no real measurable performance loss, and actually a minor
speedup because we don't need to calculate becksums on every block
write.
There are some pathological cases, such as multiple write heads, but
these are out-of-scope right now (note! multiple explicit file handles
currently handle this case beautifully because we don't share
eblock/eoff!)
Becksums were also relatively complicated, and needed extra scaffolding
to pass around/propagate as secondary tags alongside the primary bptr.
So trading these for RAM-tracking also gives us a nice bit of code/stack
savings, albeit at a 2-word RAM cost in lfsr_file_t:
code stack structs
before: 33888 2864 1096
after: 33564 (-1.0%) 2816 (-1.7%) 1104 (+0.7%)
lfsr_file_t before: 104
lfsr_file_t after: 112 (+7.7%)
littlefs
A little fail-safe filesystem designed for microcontrollers.
| | | .---._____
.-----. | |
--|o |---| littlefs |
--| |---| |
'-----' '----------'
| | |
Power-loss resilience - littlefs is designed to handle random power failures. All file operations have strong copy-on-write guarantees and if power is lost the filesystem will fall back to the last known good state.
Dynamic wear leveling - littlefs is designed with flash in mind, and provides wear leveling over dynamic blocks. Additionally, littlefs can detect bad blocks and work around them.
Bounded RAM/ROM - littlefs is designed to work with a small amount of memory. RAM usage is strictly bounded, which means RAM consumption does not change as the filesystem grows. The filesystem contains no unbounded recursion and dynamic memory is limited to configurable buffers that can be provided statically.
Example
Here's a simple example that updates a file named boot_count every time
main runs. The program can be interrupted at any time without losing track
of how many times it has been booted and without corrupting the filesystem:
#include "lfs.h"
// variables used by the filesystem
lfs_t lfs;
lfs_file_t file;
// configuration of the filesystem is provided by this struct
const struct lfs_config cfg = {
// block device operations
.read = user_provided_block_device_read,
.prog = user_provided_block_device_prog,
.erase = user_provided_block_device_erase,
.sync = user_provided_block_device_sync,
// block device configuration
.read_size = 16,
.prog_size = 16,
.block_size = 4096,
.block_count = 128,
.cache_size = 16,
.lookahead_size = 16,
.block_cycles = 500,
};
// entry point
int main(void) {
// mount the filesystem
int err = lfs_mount(&lfs, &cfg);
// reformat if we can't mount the filesystem
// this should only happen on the first boot
if (err) {
lfs_format(&lfs, &cfg);
lfs_mount(&lfs, &cfg);
}
// read current count
uint32_t boot_count = 0;
lfs_file_open(&lfs, &file, "boot_count", LFS_O_RDWR | LFS_O_CREAT);
lfs_file_read(&lfs, &file, &boot_count, sizeof(boot_count));
// update boot count
boot_count += 1;
lfs_file_rewind(&lfs, &file);
lfs_file_write(&lfs, &file, &boot_count, sizeof(boot_count));
// remember the storage is not updated until the file is closed successfully
lfs_file_close(&lfs, &file);
// release any resources we were using
lfs_unmount(&lfs);
// print the boot count
printf("boot_count: %d\n", boot_count);
}
Usage
Detailed documentation (or at least as much detail as is currently available) can be found in the comments in lfs.h.
littlefs takes in a configuration structure that defines how the filesystem operates. The configuration struct provides the filesystem with the block device operations and dimensions, tweakable parameters that tradeoff memory usage for performance, and optional static buffers if the user wants to avoid dynamic memory.
The state of the littlefs is stored in the lfs_t type which is left up
to the user to allocate, allowing multiple filesystems to be in use
simultaneously. With the lfs_t and configuration struct, a user can
format a block device or mount the filesystem.
Once mounted, the littlefs provides a full set of POSIX-like file and directory functions, with the deviation that the allocation of filesystem structures must be provided by the user.
All POSIX operations, such as remove and rename, are atomic, even in event of power-loss. Additionally, file updates are not actually committed to the filesystem until sync or close is called on the file.
Other notes
Littlefs is written in C, and specifically should compile with any compiler
that conforms to the C99 standard.
All littlefs calls have the potential to return a negative error code. The
errors can be either one of those found in the enum lfs_error in
lfs.h, or an error returned by the user's block device operations.
In the configuration struct, the prog and erase function provided by the
user may return a LFS_ERR_CORRUPT error if the implementation already can
detect corrupt blocks. However, the wear leveling does not depend on the return
code of these functions, instead all data is read back and checked for
integrity.
If your storage caches writes, make sure that the provided sync function
flushes all the data to memory and ensures that the next read fetches the data
from memory, otherwise data integrity can not be guaranteed. If the write
function does not perform caching, and therefore each read or write call
hits the memory, the sync function can simply return 0.
Design
At a high level, littlefs is a block based filesystem that uses small logs to store metadata and larger copy-on-write (COW) structures to store file data.
In littlefs, these ingredients form a sort of two-layered cake, with the small logs (called metadata pairs) providing fast updates to metadata anywhere on storage, while the COW structures store file data compactly and without any wear amplification cost.
Both of these data structures are built out of blocks, which are fed by a common block allocator. By limiting the number of erases allowed on a block per allocation, the allocator provides dynamic wear leveling over the entire filesystem.
root
.--------.--------.
| A'| B'| |
| | |-> |
| | | |
'--------'--------'
.----' '--------------.
A v B v
.--------.--------. .--------.--------.
| C'| D'| | | E'|new| |
| | |-> | | | E'|-> |
| | | | | | | |
'--------'--------' '--------'--------'
.-' '--. | '------------------.
v v .-' v
.--------. .--------. v .--------.
| C | | D | .--------. write | new E |
| | | | | E | ==> | |
| | | | | | | |
'--------' '--------' | | '--------'
'--------' .-' |
.-' '-. .-------------|------'
v v v v
.--------. .--------. .--------.
| F | | G | | new F |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
'--------' '--------' '--------'
More details on how littlefs works can be found in DESIGN.md and SPEC.md.
-
DESIGN.md - A fully detailed dive into how littlefs works. I would suggest reading it as the tradeoffs at work are quite interesting.
-
SPEC.md - The on-disk specification of littlefs with all the nitty-gritty details. May be useful for tooling development.
Testing
The littlefs comes with a test suite designed to run on a PC using the
emulated block device found in the bd directory.
The tests assume a Linux environment and can be started with make:
make test
License
The littlefs is provided under the BSD-3-Clause license. See LICENSE.md for more information. Contributions to this project are accepted under the same license.
Individual files contain the following tag instead of the full license text.
SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
This enables machine processing of license information based on the SPDX License Identifiers that are here available: http://spdx.org/licenses/
Related projects
-
littlefs-fuse - A FUSE wrapper for littlefs. The project allows you to mount littlefs directly on a Linux machine. Can be useful for debugging littlefs if you have an SD card handy.
-
littlefs-js - A javascript wrapper for littlefs. I'm not sure why you would want this, but it is handy for demos. You can see it in action here.
-
littlefs-python - A Python wrapper for littlefs. The project allows you to create images of the filesystem on your PC. Check if littlefs will fit your needs, create images for a later download to the target memory or inspect the content of a binary image of the target memory.
-
mklfs - A command line tool built by the Lua RTOS guys for making littlefs images from a host PC. Supports Windows, Mac OS, and Linux.
-
Mbed OS - The easiest way to get started with littlefs is to jump into Mbed which already has block device drivers for most forms of embedded storage. littlefs is available in Mbed OS as the LittleFileSystem class.
-
SPIFFS - Another excellent embedded filesystem for NOR flash. As a more traditional logging filesystem with full static wear-leveling, SPIFFS will likely outperform littlefs on small memories such as the internal flash on microcontrollers.
-
Dhara - An interesting NAND flash translation layer designed for small MCUs. It offers static wear-leveling and power-resilience with only a fixed O(|address|) pointer structure stored on each block and in RAM.