linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 2/2] mtd: cmdlinepart: use cmdline partition parser lib

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: <C3050A4DBA34F345975765E43127F10F1C08B2A8@szxeml512-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Date:	Fri, 8 Nov 2013 07:13:21 +0000
From:	Caizhiyong <caizhiyong@...ilicon.com>
To:	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>
CC:	Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@...e-electrons.com>,
	"Wanglin (Albert)" <albert.wanglin@...ilicon.com>,
	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Karel Zak <kzak@...hat.com>,
	"linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"Shmulik Ladkani" <shmulik.ladkani@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] mtd: cmdlinepart: use cmdline partition parser lib

> Nobody has had time to test this on MTD, it seems, and as such, I
> strongly recommend you do not force it through -mm. We are perfectly
> capable of merging it through the MTD tree if it ever gets proper
> vetting by people in MTD (not just on block devices), and I am well
> aware of this patch set's existence.
> 
> However, the patch really provides little to no benefit to the MTD
> subsystem at the moment, at the added cost of reviewing the small
> differences in parsing. For some reason, Cai decided to make small
> differences in the parser between drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c and
> block/cmdline-parser.c, and it is not obvious that these differences
> retain the same parsing. For instance, according to my code
> read-through, the block device parser seems to accept multiple
> partitions to be specified with "-" (meaning "fill the remaining
> device"). MTD already has code that rejects such a parser string
> outright.

The next '-' partition be ignore at function "cmdline_parts_set", and the client will get a right result.
Is there any other worry about '-' I don't know ?

> 
> So, I'd recommend one of the following:
> (1) We (MTD users) make more time to properly test this patch and post
> relevant results (i.e., tested partition strings) or
> (2) Somebody (Cai?) spend time to actually make block/cmdline-parser.c
> fully equivalent to the parser in drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c. That
> means it should be trivial to compare the two and say "yes, these are
> equivalent". That is currently not the case, AFAICT.

I understand your worry about, we use cmdlinepart many years.
I will spend time to make block/cmdline-parser.c fully equivalent to the
parser in drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c.

> 
> Without one of those two, I will give my NAK.
> 
> Brian
--
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/