linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mtd: nand: gpmi: add proper raw access support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:04:15 +0200
From:	Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>
To:	Iwo Mergler <Iwo.Mergler@...commwireless.com>
Cc:	Huang Shijie <shijie8@...il.com>,
	Mike Voytovich <mvoytovich@...pal.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Huang Shijie <b32955@...escale.com>,
	"linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Roy Lee <roylee@...pal.com>,
	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: nand: gpmi: add proper raw access support

Hi Iwo,

On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 11:22:11 +1000
Iwo Mergler <Iwo.Mergler@...commwireless.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 22:36:16 +1000
> Boris BREZILLON <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Well, I don't know about freescale specific tools, but at least I have
> > an example with mtd_nandbiterrs module.
> > This module is assuming it can write only the data part of a NAND page
> > without modifying the OOB area (see [1]), which in GPMI controller
> > case is impossible because raw write function store the data as if
> > there were no specific scheme, while there is one:
> > (metadata + n x (data_chunk + ECC bytes) + remaining_bytes).
> > 
> 
> Hi Boris,
> 
> 
> just as an aside, only the incremental bit errors test in nandbiterrs
> positively requires raw data write.
> 
> The overwrite test (re-write the same page data repeatedly without
> erase), only uses raw access because I was lazy. A normal ECC write
> would do just as well.

Okay.
Anyway, the test I'm really interested in is the incremental bit errors
test :-).

BTW, any reason you chose to implement this test/testsuite as a
module ?
>From my understanding (and tell me if I'm wrong) we could do the same
from user-space.

Best Regards,

Boris

-- 
Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/