Hi Boris,
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 08:52:25 +0100
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 22:42:02 +0100
> Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Starting from commit 041e4575f034 ("mtd: nand: handle ECC errors in
> > OOB"), nand_do_read_oob() (from the NAND core) did return 0 or a
> > negative error, and the MTD layer expected it.
> >
> > However, the trend for the NAND layer is now to return an error or a
> > positive number of bitflips. Deciding which status to return to the
> > user belongs to the MTD layer.
> >
> > Commit e47f68587b82 ("mtd: check for max_bitflips in
> > mtd_read_oob()") brought this logic to the mtd_read_oob() function
> > while the return value coming from nand_do_read_oob() (called by
> > the ->_read_oob() hook) was left unchanged.
> >
> > Fixes: e47f68587b82 ("mtd: check for max_bitflips in
> > mtd_read_oob()") Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >
> > Changes since v1:
> > - s/->ecc.read_oob() hook/->_read_oob() hook/ in the commit
> > message
> > - Fixed the compilation issue
> >
> > drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
> > b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c index 469220065b8b..440d9f5d5b17
> > 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
> > @@ -3876,7 +3876,7 @@ static int nand_do_read_oob(struct mtd_info
> > *mtd, loff_t from, if (mtd->ecc_stats.failed - stats.failed)
> > return -EBADMSG;
> >
> > - return mtd->ecc_stats.corrected - stats.corrected ?
> > -EUCLEAN : 0;
> > + return ret;
>
> This is wrong, you're only returning the max number of bitflips of the
> last OOB read.
I forgot about the while loop, that's right.
There will be a v3 :)
Thanks,
Miquèl