Hi Álvaro, Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@xxxxxxxxx> wrote on Tue, 12 May 2020 09:24:32 +0200: > Hi Miquèl > > > El 12 may 2020, a las 9:16, Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> escribió: > > > > Hi Álvaro, > > > > Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@xxxxxxxxx> wrote on Tue, 12 May 2020 > > 08:51:11 +0200: > > > >> The current code checks that the whole OOB area is erased. > >> This is a problem when JFFS2 cleanmarkers are added to the OOB, since it will > >> fail due to the usable OOB bytes not being 0xff. > >> Correct this by only checking that data and ECC bytes aren't 0xff. > >> > >> Fixes: 02b88eea9f9c ("mtd: brcmnand: Add check for erased page bitflips") > >> Signed-off-by: Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@xxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> v3: Fix commit log and merge nand_check_erased_ecc_chunk calls. > >> v2: Add Fixes tag > >> > >> drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c | 19 ++++++++++++++----- > >> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c > >> index e4e3ceeac38f..80fe01f03516 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c > >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/brcmnand/brcmnand.c > >> @@ -2018,8 +2018,9 @@ static int brcmnand_read_by_pio(struct mtd_info *mtd, struct nand_chip *chip, > >> static int brcmstb_nand_verify_erased_page(struct mtd_info *mtd, > >> struct nand_chip *chip, void *buf, u64 addr) > >> { > >> + struct mtd_oob_region oobecc; > >> int i, sas; > >> - void *oob = chip->oob_poi; > >> + void *oob; > >> int bitflips = 0; > >> int page = addr >> chip->page_shift; > >> int ret; > >> @@ -2035,11 +2036,19 @@ static int brcmstb_nand_verify_erased_page(struct mtd_info *mtd, > >> if (ret) > >> return ret; > >> > >> - for (i = 0; i < chip->ecc.steps; i++, oob += sas) { > >> + for (i = 0; i < chip->ecc.steps; i++) { > >> ecc_chunk = buf + chip->ecc.size * i; > >> - ret = nand_check_erased_ecc_chunk(ecc_chunk, > >> - chip->ecc.size, > >> - oob, sas, NULL, 0, > >> + > >> + if (mtd->ooblayout->ecc(mtd, i, &oobecc)) { > > > > Please use the mtdcore.c's helpers > > (mtd_ooblayout_set/get_data/free/ecc/bytes). > > > > Also, what are you trying to discriminate with the return code of the > > function? Shouldn't this function "always" work? > > Just making sure it doesn’t return an ERANGE in case chip->ecc.size doesn’t match the sections from mtd->ooblayout->ecc, which shouldn’t happen, so I think we can remove that... The style we prefer for error checking is: ret = function(); if (ret) do someting; instead of: if (function()) Anyway, I really don't know if it can happen or not. I suppose it does. What I don't understand is your "oob = chip->oob_poi + oobecc.offset". If you expect an error, then you should not update this pointer, right? Don't you need to use 2 * i instead of i here? Following your other contribution, sections are distributed like "data/ecc/data/ecc/etc". > > > > >> + oob = NULL; > >> + oobecc.length = 0; > >> + } else { > >> + oob = chip->oob_poi + oobecc.offset; > >> + } > >> + > >> + ret = nand_check_erased_ecc_chunk(ecc_chunk, chip->ecc.size, > >> + oob, oobecc.length, > >> + NULL, 0, > >> chip->ecc.strength); > > > > As I told you, this helper takes "maid data" then "spare area" then > > "ecc bytes". The names are pretty important here as you want to avoid > > checking the spare OOB bytes on purpose, so maybe you could have more > > meaningful names and call "ecc" instead of "oob" the ecc region? > > Actually I thought you meant the commit log, not the code itself... No problem ;) I meant both actually, And I think you should name the oob pointer ecc_bytes. > > > > >> if (ret < 0) > >> return ret; > > > > > > Thanks, > > Miquèl > > Regards, > Álvaro. > Thanks, Miquèl ______________________________________________________ Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/