Re: [PROBLEM linux-next]

[Mirsad Todorovac <mtodorovac69@gmail.com>]

On 7/7/24 10:12, Jonas Gorski wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Jul 2024 at 09:38, Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl> wrote:
>>
>> Some more descriptive subject would be nice :)
>>
>>
>> On 7.07.2024 02:10, Mirsad Todorovac wrote:
>>> In file included from ./include/asm-generic/bug.h:22,
>>>                   from ./arch/x86/include/asm/bug.h:87,
>>>                   from ./include/linux/bug.h:5,
>>>                   from ./include/linux/fortify-string.h:6,
>>>                   from ./include/linux/string.h:374,
>>>                   from ./arch/x86/include/asm/page_32.h:18,
>>>                   from ./arch/x86/include/asm/page.h:14,
>>>                   from ./arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h:20,
>>>                   from ./arch/x86/include/asm/timex.h:5,
>>>                   from ./include/linux/timex.h:67,
>>>                   from ./include/linux/time32.h:13,
>>>                   from ./include/linux/time.h:60,
>>>                   from ./include/linux/stat.h:19,
>>>                   from ./include/linux/module.h:13,
>>>                   from drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c:10:
>>> drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c: In function ‘parse_mtd_partitions’:
>>> drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c:693:34: error: ‘%s’ directive argument is null [-Werror=format-overflow=]
>>>    693 |                         pr_debug("%s: got parser %s\n", master->name,
>>>        |                                  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> ./include/linux/printk.h:376:21: note: in definition of macro ‘pr_fmt’
>>>    376 | #define pr_fmt(fmt) fmt
>>>        |                     ^~~
>>> ./include/linux/dynamic_debug.h:248:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘__dynamic_func_call_cls’
>>>    248 |         __dynamic_func_call_cls(__UNIQUE_ID(ddebug), cls, fmt, func, ##__VA_ARGS__)
>>>        |         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> ./include/linux/dynamic_debug.h:250:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘_dynamic_func_call_cls’
>>>    250 |         _dynamic_func_call_cls(_DPRINTK_CLASS_DFLT, fmt, func, ##__VA_ARGS__)
>>>        |         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> ./include/linux/dynamic_debug.h:269:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘_dynamic_func_call’
>>>    269 |         _dynamic_func_call(fmt, __dynamic_pr_debug,             \
>>>        |         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> ./include/linux/printk.h:610:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘dynamic_pr_debug’
>>>    610 |         dynamic_pr_debug(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
>>>        |         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c:693:25: note: in expansion of macro ‘pr_debug’
>>>    693 |                         pr_debug("%s: got parser %s\n", master->name,
>>>        |                         ^~~~~~~~
>>> drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c:693:50: note: format string is defined here
>>>    693 |                         pr_debug("%s: got parser %s\n", master->name,
>>>        |                                                  ^~
>>>
>>> Offending commit is 5b644aa012f67.
>>
>> Actually it goes back to 2015 to the commit 8e2c992b59fc ("mtd: mtdpart: add debug prints to partition parser.").
>>
>>
>>> Proposed non-intrusive fix resolves the warning/error, but I could not test the code.
>>> (I don't have the physical device.)
>>>
>>> -----------------><------------------------------------------
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c
>>> index 6811a714349d..81665d67ed2d 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdpart.c
>>> @@ -691,7 +691,7 @@ int parse_mtd_partitions(struct mtd_info *master, const char *const *types,
>>>                          if (!parser && !request_module("%s", *types))
>>>                                  parser = mtd_part_parser_get(*types);
>>>                          pr_debug("%s: got parser %s\n", master->name,
>>> -                               parser ? parser->name : NULL);
>>> +                               parser ? parser->name : "(null"));
>>>                          if (!parser)
>>>                                  continue;
>>>                          ret = mtd_part_do_parse(parser, master, &pparts, data);
>>>
>>>
>>> Hope this helps.
>>
>> I'd say it's simple enough to send patch without actual hw testing.
> 
> Though the kernel's vsprintf will already handle NULL pointers and
> print "(null)" [1], so I'm not sure if this is an actual improvement.
> 
> The only way this can be NULL though is if the request_module()
> failed, so maybe a proper error message would be better here instead
> of an obscure "got parser (null)". You don't even know which type
> wasn't available. E.g. pr_debug("%: no parser for type %s
> available\n", master->name, *types).

Agreed. Your proposal is much more descriptive.

Will you do this patch or should I and put a Suggested-by: ?

However, I would sleep much better if this is tested on actual hw. :-/

Best regards,
Mirsad Todorovac

> [1] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/lib/vsprintf.c#L696
> 
> Best Regards,
> Jonas

______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/