From: Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@kernel.org>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>,
MTD Maling List <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mtd: Check add_mtd_device() ret code
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 12:03:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190129120337.08754bac@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190122133159.2033844c@bbrezillon>
Hi Geert,
On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 13:31:59 +0100
Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 12:21:11 +0100
> Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi Boris,
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 3:37 PM Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > add_mtd_device() can fail. We should always check its return value
> > > and gracefully handle the failure case. Fix the call sites where this
> > > not done (in mtdpart.c) and add a __must_check attribute to the
> > > prototype to avoid this kind of mistakes.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@kernel.org>
> > > ---
> > > No Fixes or Cc-stable tag here, as this seems to have worked just fine
> > > without checking add_mtd_device() ret code until we started to expose
> > > MTD devices as NVMEM providers (queued for 4.21).
> >
> > Oh yes ;-)
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/87feac02-e955-1897-d4a4-d6d6d1082e45@gmail.com/t/
> >
> > Your patch is very similar to mine, so the crash is gone.
>
> Oops, sorry about that. I completely forgot about this patch. It seems
> the discussion led to a different conclusion though (patch
> allocate_partitions() to reject wrong parts early) and the v2 was never
> sent (or I missed it). Anyway, I guess we should have done both (check
> add_mtd_device() ret code everywhere and patch allocate_partitions() to
> reject bad parts early).
>
> > However, the warning is still there:
> >
> > m25p80 spi0.0: s25sl032p (4096 Kbytes)
> > 3 fixed-partitions partitions found on MTD device spi0.0
> > Creating 3 MTD partitions on "spi0.0":
> > 0x000000000000-0x000000080000 : "loader"
> > 0x000000080000-0x000000600000 : "user"
> > mtd: partition "user" extends beyond the end of device "spi0.0" --
> > size truncated to 0x380000
> > 0x000000600000-0x000004000000 : "flash"
> > mtd: partition "flash" is out of reach -- disabled
> > ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at drivers/mtd/mtdcore.c:571
> > add_mtd_device+0x90/0x3b0
> >
> > Interestingly, only one partition is created, covering the full size of the
> > device:
> >
> > # cat /proc/partitions
> > major minor #blocks name
> >
> > 31 0 4096 mtdblock0
> >
> > While I would expect two partitions, "loader" and truncated "user":
> >
> > 31 0 512 mtdblock0
> > 31 1 3584 mtdblock1
>
> Yes, makes sense, I guess your patch was better than mine :-/. Can you
> try with the following diff applied and let me know if it solves the
> problem?
Gentle ping: is this diff fixing your problem, and do you want me to
send a proper patch for it or should I let you send one?
>
> --->8---
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c
> index 60104e1079c5..aefd3344991f 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c
> @@ -724,16 +724,14 @@ int add_mtd_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
> {
> struct mtd_part *slave;
> uint64_t cur_offset = 0;
> - int i, ret;
> + int i, ret, actual_nbparts = 0;
>
> printk(KERN_NOTICE "Creating %d MTD partitions on \"%s\":\n", nbparts, master->name);
>
> for (i = 0; i < nbparts; i++) {
> slave = allocate_partition(master, parts + i, i, cur_offset);
> - if (IS_ERR(slave)) {
> - ret = PTR_ERR(slave);
> - goto err_del_partitions;
> - }
> + if (IS_ERR(slave))
> + continue;
>
> mutex_lock(&mtd_partitions_mutex);
> list_add(&slave->list, &mtd_partitions);
> @@ -746,7 +744,7 @@ int add_mtd_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
> mutex_unlock(&mtd_partitions_mutex);
>
> free_partition(slave);
> - goto err_del_partitions;
> + continue;
> }
>
> mtd_add_partition_attrs(slave);
> @@ -754,14 +752,10 @@ int add_mtd_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
> parse_mtd_partitions(&slave->mtd, parts[i].types, NULL);
>
> cur_offset = slave->offset + slave->mtd.size;
> + actual_nbparts++;
> }
>
> - return 0;
> -
> -err_del_partitions:
> - del_mtd_partitions(master);
> -
> - return ret;
> + return actual_nbparts;
> }
>
> static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(part_parser_lock);
> @@ -1003,10 +997,10 @@ int parse_mtd_partitions(struct mtd_info *master, const char *const *types,
> }
> /* Found partitions! */
> if (ret > 0) {
> - err = add_mtd_partitions(master, pparts.parts,
> + ret = add_mtd_partitions(master, pparts.parts,
> pparts.nr_parts);
> mtd_part_parser_cleanup(&pparts);
> - return err ? err : pparts.nr_parts;
> + return ret;
> }
> /*
> * Stash the first error we see; only report it if no parser
______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-29 11:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-02 14:36 [PATCH 1/2] mtd: Fix the check on nvmem_register() ret code Boris Brezillon
2019-01-02 14:36 ` [PATCH 2/2] mtd: Check add_mtd_device() " Boris Brezillon
2019-01-08 8:29 ` [2/2] " Boris Brezillon
2019-01-22 11:21 ` [PATCH 2/2] " Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-01-22 12:31 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-01-29 11:03 ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
2019-01-29 15:29 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-01-30 8:52 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-01-30 9:05 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-01-30 9:10 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-01-30 9:16 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-02-01 8:50 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-02-01 9:02 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-01-30 9:17 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-01-30 8:55 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-01-30 9:12 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-04-01 9:50 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-04-01 13:27 ` Boris Brezillon
2019-01-02 15:13 ` [PATCH 1/2] mtd: Fix the check on nvmem_register() " Bartosz Golaszewski
2019-01-08 8:30 ` [1/2] " Boris Brezillon
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=20190129120337.08754bac@bbrezillon \
--to=bbrezillon@kernel.org \
--cc=boris.brezillon@bootlin.com \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=marek.vasut@gmail.com \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).