linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] UBIFS: don't fail on -EBADMSG when fixing free space

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:	Wed, 18 May 2011 17:41:11 -0400
From:	"Matthew L. Creech" <mlcreech@...il.com>
To:	Ben Gardiner <bengardiner@...ometrics.ca>
Cc:	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...ia.com>,
	linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBIFS: don't fail on -EBADMSG when fixing free space

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Ben Gardiner
<bengardiner@...ometrics.ca> wrote:
> +       /*
> +        * Don't fail on -EBADMSG since these are precisely the error codes that
> +        * are returned by ubi_red in the cases where free-space fix-ups are
> +        * required.
> +        */

Hi Ben,

Off-hand, I don't see how this comment can be true.  It seems like
we'll have 2 cases:

1. The pages in question are actually erased, in which case they'll be
0xff-filled by ubi_read() without error, or
2. The pages were programmed with all 0xff data, in which case the ECC
info should be correct

There's a third possibility, that the ECC info is bad because there's
a real error, but that's not something we can reliably recover from.
Am I overlooking another scenario?

-- 
Matthew L. Creech
--
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/