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: <20120826090603.6b833e54@pixies.home.jungo.com>
Date:	Sun, 26 Aug 2012 09:06:03 +0300
From:	Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@...il.com>
To:	Huang Shijie <shijie8@...il.com>
Cc:	dwmw2@...radead.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dedekind1@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: cmdlinepart: fix the wrong partitions number
 when truncating occurs

Hi,

On Sat, 25 Aug 2012 05:26:51 -0400 Huang Shijie <shijie8@...il.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:02 AM, Shmulik Ladkani
> <shmulik.ladkani@...il.com> wrote:
> > Your analysis seems right, but let me offer an alternative approach.
> >
> > I would simply:
> >
> > -                                       part->num_parts = i;
> your code does not wors in such kernel command line(also with the 1GB
> nand chip):
> #gpmi-nand:100m(root),100m(kernel),1g(rootfs),1g(user),-(rest)
> 

Can you please detail what do you mean by "not work"?

To my understanding, in this example, according to my suggestion, the
resulting partitions would be:

root	100m@0
kernel	100m@...m
rootfs	800m@...m (truncated)
user	0@1g (truncated)
rest	0@1g

Reasonable IMO, given the fact that the mtd device size is smaller than
the specified parts.

I saw you submitted a patch which sorts the cmdline parts; I don't
understand why this is necessary.
Also, sorting might not be desirable, as the user specified the unsorted
partitions might have _wanted_ them to appear in that order.

Now lets focus on your original suggestion and its consequences:

- Orignal code STOPPED parsing at the 1st truncated partition,
  this partition WAS NOT returned to the caller
- Your patch STOPS AFTER parsing the 1st truncated partition,
  this partiton IS returned to the caller (but partitions specified
  later are no longer parsed)
- My suggestion CONTINUES parsing all partitions.
  So later partitions (specified with the 'size' but *without* 'offset')
  will be truncated AND presented to the caller.
  AND, if later partitions are specified using the 'size@...set'
  explicit format, they are parsed normally.
  
Regards,
Shmulik
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ