Re: [PATCH] ubi-utils: Implement a ubihealthd

[Alexander Dahl <ada@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Richard,

after someone in the Q&A to one of the Embedded Recipe conference talks this 
week mentioned, NAND flash needs special care. I knew, but put that to the 
back of my head until today. So I stumbled over this here again and wanted to 
look into it. 

Thanks for your effort in this and jumping in, however I have some questions 
below.

Am Donnerstag, 25. Juli 2019, 22:34:42 CEST schrieb Richard Weinberger:
> ubihealthd is a simple daemon which scans every PEB
> of an UBI device in random order.
> It helps to deal with read disturb on systems which either
> reboot seldom, use fastmap or read few data.
> 
> To use this daemon you need Linux >= v5.1.

What is it exactly, which requires such a new Linux Kernel? The latest LTS is 
still v4.19 … ;-)

> 
> Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@xxxxxx>
> ---
>  ubi-utils/Makemodule.am |   6 +-
>  ubi-utils/ubihealthd.c  | 272
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 277
> insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>  create mode 100644 ubi-utils/ubihealthd.c
> 
> diff --git a/ubi-utils/Makemodule.am b/ubi-utils/Makemodule.am
> index 215eac27f5a5..984e2cd79287 100644
> --- a/ubi-utils/Makemodule.am
> +++ b/ubi-utils/Makemodule.am
> @@ -37,9 +37,13 @@ ubirsvol_LDADD = libmtd.a libubi.a
>  ubiblock_SOURCES = ubi-utils/ubiblock.c
>  ubiblock_LDADD = libmtd.a libubi.a
> 
> +ubihealthd_SOURCES = ubi-utils/ubihealthd.c
> +ubihealthd_LDADD = libmtd.a libubi.a
> +
>  UBI_BINS = \
>  	ubiupdatevol ubimkvol ubirmvol ubicrc32 ubinfo ubiattach \
> -	ubidetach ubinize ubiformat ubirename mtdinfo ubirsvol ubiblock
> +	ubidetach ubinize ubiformat ubirename mtdinfo ubirsvol ubiblock \
> +	ubihealthd
> 
>  UBI_MAN = \
>  	ubi-utils/ubinize.8
> diff --git a/ubi-utils/ubihealthd.c b/ubi-utils/ubihealthd.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..3e665be455ac
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/ubi-utils/ubihealthd.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,272 @@
> +#include <errno.h>
> +#include <fcntl.h>
> +#include <getopt.h>
> +#include <inttypes.h>
> +#include <mtd/ubi-user.h>
> +#include <poll.h>
> +#include <signal.h>
> +#include <stdarg.h>
> +#include <stdint.h>
> +#include <stdio.h>
> +#include <stdlib.h>
> +#include <string.h>
> +#include <sys/ioctl.h>
> +#include <syslog.h>
> +#include <sys/random.h>

This sys/random.h needs at least glibc >= 2.25, right?

> +#include <sys/signalfd.h>
> +#include <sys/stat.h>
> +#include <sys/timerfd.h>
> +#include <sys/types.h>
> +#include <unistd.h>
> +
> +#define PROGRAM_NAME "ubihealthd"
> +
> +#include "libubi.h"
> +#include "common.h"
> +
> +#ifndef UBI_IOCRPEB
> +#define UBI_IOCRPEB _IOW(UBI_IOC_MAGIC, 4, int32_t)
> +#endif
> +
> +struct peb_state {
> +	int alive;
> +	int pnum;
> +	int last_errno;
> +};
> +
> +static struct peb_state **peb_state_array;
> +static int peb_state_array_len;
> +static int cur_pos;
> +static const char *ubi_device = "/dev/ubi0";
> +static int ubi_fd;
> +static int interval_secs = 120;
> +static int nodaemon;
> +
> +static const char opt_string[] = "d:i:f";
> +static const struct option options[] = {
> +        {
> +                .name = "device",
> +                .has_arg = required_argument,
> +                .flag = NULL,
> +                .val = 'd'
> +        },
> +        {
> +                .name = "interval",
> +                .has_arg = required_argument,
> +                .flag = NULL,
> +                .val = 'i'
> +        },
> +};
> +
> +static void dolog(const char *fmt, ...)
> +{
> +	va_list ap;
> +
> +	va_start(ap, fmt);
> +	if (nodaemon)
> +		vfprintf(stderr, fmt, ap);
> +	else
> +		vsyslog(LOG_DAEMON | LOG_WARNING, fmt, ap);
> +	va_end(ap);
> +}
> +
> +static void build_peb_list(void)
> +{
> +	int i, pos;
> +	struct peb_state *ps;
> +
> +	peb_state_array = xmalloc(sizeof(ps) * peb_state_array_len);
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < peb_state_array_len; i++) {
> +		ps = xmalloc(sizeof(*ps));
> +
> +		ps->pnum = i;
> +		ps->last_errno = 0;
> +		ps->alive = 1;
> +
> +		peb_state_array[i] = ps;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Shuffle the list */
> +	for (i = 0; i < peb_state_array_len; i++) {
> +		pos = rand() % peb_state_array_len;
> +
> +		ps = peb_state_array[pos];
> +		peb_state_array[pos] = peb_state_array[i];
> +		peb_state_array[i] = ps;
> +	}
> +}
> +
> +static struct peb_state *__next_peb(void)
> +{
> +	struct peb_state *ps = peb_state_array[cur_pos];
> +
> +	cur_pos++;
> +	if (cur_pos >= peb_state_array_len)
> +		cur_pos = 0;
> +
> +	return ps;
> +}
> +
> +static struct peb_state *next_peb(void)
> +{
> +	int i;
> +	struct peb_state *ps;
> +
> +	/* Find next PEB in our list, skip bad PEBs */
> +	for (i = 0; i < peb_state_array_len; i++) {
> +		ps = __next_peb();
> +		if (ps->alive)
> +			return ps;
> +	}
> +
> +	dolog("Fatal: All PEBs are gone?!\n");
> +	exit(1);
> +
> +	return NULL;
> +}
> +
> +static int process_one_peb(void)
> +{
> +	int rc;
> +	struct peb_state *ps = next_peb();
> +
> +	rc = ioctl(ubi_fd, UBI_IOCRPEB, &ps->pnum);
> +	if (!rc)
> +		return 0;
> +	else
> +		rc = errno;
> +
> +	switch (rc) {
> +	case EINVAL: {
> +		dolog("Unable to check PEB %i for unknown reason!\n", ps->pnum);
> +		break;
> +	}
> +	case ENOENT: {
> +		/* UBI ignores this PEB */
> +		ps->alive = 0;
> +		break;
> +	}
> +	case EBUSY: {
> +		if (ps->last_errno == rc)
> +			dolog("Warning: Unable to check PEB %i\n", ps->pnum);
> +		break;
> +	}
> +	case EAGAIN: {
> +		if (ps->last_errno == rc)
> +			dolog("Warning: PEB %i has bitflips, but cannot scrub!\n", ps->pnum);
> +		break;
> +	}
> +	case EUCLEAN: {
> +		/* Scrub happened */
> +		break;
> +	}
> +	case ENOTTY: {
> +		dolog("Fatal: Kernel does not support this interface. Too old
> kernel?\n"); +		exit(1);
> +		break;
> +	}
> +	case ENODEV: {
> +		dolog("Fatal: UBI device vanished under us.\n");
> +		exit(1);
> +	}
> +	default:
> +		dolog("Warning: Unknown return code from kernel: %i\n", rc);
> +	}
> +
> +	ps->last_errno = rc;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int get_peb_count(void)
> +{
> +	libubi_t libubi = libubi_open();
> +	struct ubi_dev_info dev_info;
> +
> +	if (!libubi) {
> +		fprintf(stderr, "Unable to init libubi, is UBI present?\n");
> +		exit(1);
> +	}
> +
> +	if (ubi_get_dev_info(libubi, ubi_device, &dev_info)) {
> +		fprintf(stderr, "Fatal: Could not get ubi info for %s\n", ubi_device);
> +		exit(1);
> +	}
> +
> +	libubi_close(libubi);
> +
> +	return dev_info.total_lebs;
> +}
> +
> +static void init_prng(void)
> +{
> +	int ret, seed;
> +
> +	ret = getrandom(&seed, sizeof(seed), 0);
> +	if (ret != sizeof(seed)) {
> +		if (ret == -1)
> +			fprintf(stderr, "Unable to get random seed: %m\n");
> +		else
> +			fprintf(stderr, "Unable to get %zi bytes random seed\n", 
sizeof(seed));
> +
> +		exit(1);
> +	}
> +	srand(seed);
> +}

Is it really necessary to seed with getrandom() for just randomizing a list of 
PEBs? I know this is embedded, and seeding with the same time on each boot 
(those devices always start 1970 ;-) ) might be a bad idea for crypto, but for 
just shuffling a PEB list to spread those tests randomly?

> +
> +int main (int argc, char *argv[])
> +{
> +	int c, i;
> +
> +	while ((c = getopt_long(argc, argv, opt_string, options, &i)) != -1) {
> +		switch(c) {
> +		case 'd': {
> +			ubi_device = optarg;
> +			break;
> +		}
> +		case 'i': {
> +			interval_secs = atoi(optarg);
> +			if (!interval_secs) {
> +				fprintf(stderr, "Bad interval value! %s\n", optarg);
> +				exit(1);
> +			}
> +			break;
> +		}
> +		case 'f': {
> +			nodaemon = 1;
> +			break;
> +		}
> +		case '?':
> +		default:
> +			fprintf(stderr, "Usage: %s [ -d UBI_DEVICE ] [-i INTERVAL_SEC ] [ -f
> ]\n", argv[0]); +			exit(1);
> +			break;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	ubi_fd = open(ubi_device, O_RDONLY);
> +	if (ubi_fd == -1) {
> +		fprintf(stderr, "Fatal: Unable to open %s: %m\n", ubi_device);
> +		exit(1);
> +	}
> +
> +	init_prng();
> +
> +	peb_state_array_len = get_peb_count();
> +	build_peb_list();
> +
> +	if (!nodaemon) {
> +		if (daemon(0, 0) == -1) {
> +			fprintf(stderr, "Unable to become a daemon: %m\n");
> +			exit(1);
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	for (;;) {
> +		process_one_peb();
> +		sleep(interval_secs);
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

I'd really like to test this daemon, but also for older systems not running 
bleeding edge BSPs. Would you accept patches to make it work with let's say 
kernel v4.9 and glibc v2.20 … O:-)

Greets
Alex


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