linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] UBI: fastmap: fix backward compatibility with image

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:	Fri, 27 Sep 2013 15:21:08 +0200
From:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To:	Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@...il.com>
CC:	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	linux-mtd <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI: fastmap: fix backward compatibility with image_seq

Am 27.09.2013 15:16, schrieb Richard Genoud:
> 2013/9/27 Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>:
>> Am 27.09.2013 14:51, schrieb Richard Genoud:
>>> Some old UBI implementations (e.g. U-Boot) have not implemented the image
>>> sequence feature.
>>> So, when erase blocks are written, the image sequence in the ec header
>>> is lost (set to zero).
>>> UBI scan_all() takes this case into account (commits
>>> 32bc4820287a1a03982979515949e8ea56eac641 and
>>> 2eadaad67b2b6bd132eda105128d2d466298b8e3)
>>>
>>> But fastmap scan functions (ubi_scan_fastmap() and scan_pool()) didn't.
>>>
>>> This patch fixes the issue.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Genoud <richard.genoud@...il.com>
>>> ---
>>
>> W00t! Good catch!
>>
>> Acked-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
> Thanks :)
> 
> 
> There's still an error when the image sequence is bad:
> [   35.632812] UBI error: scan_pool: bad image seq: 0x0, expected: 0x6e452f03
> [   35.640625] UBI error: ubi_scan_fastmap: Attach by fastmap failed,
> doing a full scan!
> [   35.648437] kmem_cache_destroy ubi_ainf_peb_slab: Slab cache still
> has objects  <- the destroy_ai in line 1415

*grrr*, the problem here is that not all allocations which are done via
kmem_cache_alloc(ai->aeb_slab_cache, ...) got kfree()'d.

Thanks,
//richard
--
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/