From: Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@gmail.com>
To: Huang Shijie <shijie8@gmail.com>, dedekind1@gmail.com
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, dwmw2@infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: cmdlinepart: fix the wrong check condition
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 12:31:49 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120825123149.3fafa4f4@halley> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1345925210-7500-1-git-send-email-shijie8@gmail.com>
Hi Huang, Artem,
On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 16:06:50 -0400 Huang Shijie <shijie8@gmail.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c b/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
> index fc960a3..216d751 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
> @@ -322,13 +322,16 @@ static int parse_cmdline_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
> struct cmdline_mtd_partition *part;
> const char *mtd_id = master->name;
>
> + if (!mtd_id)
> + return 0;
> +
> /* parse command line */
> if (!cmdline_parsed)
> mtdpart_setup_real(cmdline);
>
> for(part = partitions; part; part = part->next)
> {
> - if ((!mtd_id) || (!strcmp(part->mtd_id, mtd_id)))
> + if (!strcmp(part->mtd_id, mtd_id))
> {
> for(i = 0, offset = 0; i < part->num_parts; i++)
> {
This changes the behavior of cmdling parsing, which might affect users
expecting the old behavior.
According to the remark above 'parse_cmdline_partitions':
* It returns partitions for the requested mtd device, or
* the first one in the chain if a NULL mtd_id is passed in.
I think the purpose of a NULL 'mtd_id' was to support simple systems
where there's a single driver and a single chip.
The driver could be dumb, not specifying its 'mtd_info->name'
(thus, a NULL mtd_id is passed).
In this case, since the system is simply configured (one driver, one
chip), 'parse_cmdline_partitions' simply disregards the "mtd-id" name
specified in the cmdline string, allowing the user to present some
arbitrary string there.
I quite remember seeing this pattern somewhere in the past, I don't know
if it's still used, though.
Obviously if you have many drivers (and many chips) in a system, that
won't work; the drivers must initialize 'mtd_info->name' and the user
should present a cmdline that has explicit 'mtd-id's.
So question is, would we like to prohibit NULL mtd-id?
If so, we must make sure all drivers are properly assigning their
'mtd_info->name', and all users correctly specifying 'mtd-id' in their
"mtdparts" cmdline strings.
Regards,
Shmulik
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@gmail.com>
To: Huang Shijie <shijie8@gmail.com>, dedekind1@gmail.com
Cc: dwmw2@infradead.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: cmdlinepart: fix the wrong check condition
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 12:31:49 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120825123149.3fafa4f4@halley> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1345925210-7500-1-git-send-email-shijie8@gmail.com>
Hi Huang, Artem,
On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 16:06:50 -0400 Huang Shijie <shijie8@gmail.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c b/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
> index fc960a3..216d751 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
> @@ -322,13 +322,16 @@ static int parse_cmdline_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
> struct cmdline_mtd_partition *part;
> const char *mtd_id = master->name;
>
> + if (!mtd_id)
> + return 0;
> +
> /* parse command line */
> if (!cmdline_parsed)
> mtdpart_setup_real(cmdline);
>
> for(part = partitions; part; part = part->next)
> {
> - if ((!mtd_id) || (!strcmp(part->mtd_id, mtd_id)))
> + if (!strcmp(part->mtd_id, mtd_id))
> {
> for(i = 0, offset = 0; i < part->num_parts; i++)
> {
This changes the behavior of cmdling parsing, which might affect users
expecting the old behavior.
According to the remark above 'parse_cmdline_partitions':
* It returns partitions for the requested mtd device, or
* the first one in the chain if a NULL mtd_id is passed in.
I think the purpose of a NULL 'mtd_id' was to support simple systems
where there's a single driver and a single chip.
The driver could be dumb, not specifying its 'mtd_info->name'
(thus, a NULL mtd_id is passed).
In this case, since the system is simply configured (one driver, one
chip), 'parse_cmdline_partitions' simply disregards the "mtd-id" name
specified in the cmdline string, allowing the user to present some
arbitrary string there.
I quite remember seeing this pattern somewhere in the past, I don't know
if it's still used, though.
Obviously if you have many drivers (and many chips) in a system, that
won't work; the drivers must initialize 'mtd_info->name' and the user
should present a cmdline that has explicit 'mtd-id's.
So question is, would we like to prohibit NULL mtd-id?
If so, we must make sure all drivers are properly assigning their
'mtd_info->name', and all users correctly specifying 'mtd-id' in their
"mtdparts" cmdline strings.
Regards,
Shmulik
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-25 9:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-25 20:06 [PATCH v2] mtd: cmdlinepart: fix the wrong check condition Huang Shijie
2012-08-25 20:06 ` Huang Shijie
2012-08-25 9:31 ` Shmulik Ladkani [this message]
2012-08-25 9:31 ` Shmulik Ladkani
2012-08-26 7:52 ` Huang Shijie
2012-08-26 7:52 ` Huang Shijie
2012-09-02 10:56 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-09-02 10:56 ` Artem Bityutskiy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120825123149.3fafa4f4@halley \
--to=shmulik.ladkani@gmail.com \
--cc=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=shijie8@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.