linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/7] [RFC] UBI: Add checkpoint on-chip layout

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]

Message-ID: <1336735041.2625.35.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 11 May 2012 14:17:21 +0300
From:	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
Cc:	linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, tim.bird@...sony.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Heinz.Egger@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] [RFC] UBI: Add checkpoint on-chip layout

I'd like to a git tree for this stuff at some point, when you feel you
are ready, and then do all further changes incrementally on top of that.
Then would also be able to participate - at least do minor things myself
and send patches to you.

On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 19:38 +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MTD_UBI_CHECKPOINT
> +#define UBI_CP_SB_VOLUME_ID	(UBI_LAYOUT_VOLUME_ID + 1)
> +#define UBI_CP_DATA_VOLUME_ID	(UBI_CP_SB_VOLUME_ID + 1)

#define UBI_CP_DATA_VOLUME_ID	(UBI_LAYOUT_VOLUME_ID + 2)

is more readable I think.

> +#define UBI_CP_MAX_BLOCKS	32

This really needs a comment on top of it telling how big flash with say,
128KiB PEB size this would support.

> +
> +/**
> + * struct ubi_cp_sb - UBI checkpoint super block
> + * @magic: checkpoint super block magic number (%UBI_CP_SB_MAGIC)
> + * @version: format version of this checkpoint
> + * @data_crc: CRC over the checkpoint data
> + * @nblocks: number of PEBs used by this checkpoint
> + * @block_loc: an array containing the location of all PEBs of the checkpoint
> + * @block_ec: the erase counter of each used PEB
> + * @sqnum: highest sequence number value at the time while taking the checkpoint
> + *
> + * The checkpoint
> + */
> +struct ubi_cp_sb {
> +	__be32 magic;
> +	__u8 version;
> +	__be32 data_crc;
> +	__be32 nblocks;
> +	__be32 block_loc[UBI_CP_MAX_BLOCKS];
> +	__be32 block_ec[UBI_CP_MAX_BLOCKS];
> +	__be64 sqnum;
> +} __packed;

Please, unless it is size-critical, always leave some unused space in
on-flash data structure for possible future extensions, and initialize
them to 0.

BTW, side-note, please, check that you follow the convention of UBI and
make all on-flash data structures 64-bit aligned (of course unless it is
size-critical).

> +/**
> + * struct ubi_cp_long_pool - Checkpoint pool with long term used PEBs
> + * @magic: long pool magic numer (%UBI_CP_LPOOL_MAGIC)
> + * @size: current pool size
> + * @pebs: an array containing the location of all PEBs in this pool
> + */
> +struct ubi_cp_long_pool {
> +	__be32 magic;
> +	__be32 size;
> +	__be32 pebs[UBI_CP_MAX_POOL_SIZE];
> +} __packed;

What's the perpose of having these pools - once you read all the
information from the fastmap and the wl subsystem inserts it to the
RB-trees - you already know this data. Why you need to store this on the
flash? This whole pool think look redundant and unneeded.

> +/**
> + * struct ubi_cp_ec - stores the erase counter of a PEB
> + * @pnum: PEB number
> + * @ec: ec of this PEB
> + */
> +struct ubi_cp_ec {
> +	__be32 pnum;
> +	__be32 ec;
> +} __packed;

It is weird that you do not have an array of ECs instead for _every_
PEB. Why wasting the flash and time writing/reading this data?

> +/**
> + * struct ubi_cp_eba - denotes an association beween a PEB and LEB
> + * @lnum: LEB number
> + * @pnum: PEB number
> + */
> +struct ubi_cp_eba {
> +	__be32 lnum;
> +	__be32 pnum;
> +} __packed;

Same here - I'd expect a simple array for every PEB in the system.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)