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, 4 May 2016 09:36:05 +0800
From:	Peter Pan <peterpansjtu@...il.com>
To:	Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
	karlzhang@...ron.com, beanhuo@...ron.com,
	Jiancheng Xue <xuejiancheng@...wei.com>,
	Peter Pan <peterpandong@...ron.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/11] mtd: nand_bbt: introduce BBT related data structure

Hi Boris,

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Boris Brezillon
<boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com> wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:40:40 +0800
> Peter Pan <peterpansjtu@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >> So it's true, it
>> >> should still be numchips in nand_bbt.c?  I just came out this question when
>> >> making v4. :)
>> >
>> > BTW, I have something for you [1]. I started to move things around to
>> > allow spinand and onenand layers to lie under drivers/mtd/nand/, and I
>> > wonder if we shouldn't do this move before reworking the nand_bbt code
>> > to make it generic.
>> > Note that this rework is not finished yet, but it gives a rough idea of
>> > what I'd like to see.
>>
>> I saw you also rework BBT in your git tree, which is a bit duplicate
>> with my BBT patch,
>> so should I continue my BBT patch by join part of your BBT rework code
>> or continue
>> your git tree ?
>
> Well, if you ask me what I'd prefer, it's clearly the 2nd solution.
> Note that my branch should just serve as a reference of what I expect,
> it just a pile of rework that should probably be reordered and cleaned
> up.
>
> Here's the sequencing I'd like to see:
>
> 1/ Move include/linux/mtd/nand.h into include/linux/mtd/rawnand.h and
>    move all files under drivers/mtd/nand/ into
>    drivers/mtd/nand/rawnand (including nand_bbt.c). This can be done in
>    several patches
>
> 2/ Add the generic nand layer (include/linux/mtd/nand.h and
>    drivers/mtd/nand/core.c). In my version I put everything in
>    include/linux/mtd/nand.h, but maybe we'll need a few functions to be
>    defined in drivers/mtd/nand/core.c.
>
> 3/ Create a rawnand_device structure inheriting from nand_device, and
>    then make nand_chip inherit from rawnand_device. Patch the
>    nand_base.c code to initialize all the nand_device fields properly,
>    so that we'll be ready to switch to the generic BBT code.
>
> 4/ Modify the nand_bbt.c code to make use of the generic NAND interface
>    instead of the MTD and rawnand one (this implies identifying all the
>    generic helpers you might need, and implementing them in
>    include/linux/mtd/nand.h or drivers/mtd/nand/core.c).
>
> 5/ Move drivers/mtd/nand/rawnand/nand_bbt.c into
>    drivers/mtd/nand/bbt.c
>
> 6/[optional] Implement your spinand layer in drivers/mtd/nand/spinand
>
> I know I'm asking a lot, especially given that you already spent a lot
> of time iterating on this BBT rework series. But your goal is to move
> mt29f driver out of staging, and you'll need to do the generic NAND
> layer to achieve that, so I'd really prefer having the BBT code use
> this generic layer instead of directly using the MTD API + an extra set
> of NAND specific structs (like the nand_chip_layout_info one).

Yes, I want to upstreaming my SPI NAND frameworks and it's indeed better
to have a nand core. In fact, I already finished a SPI NAND framework with
the BBT patch I sent which is directly under MTD (don't have a NAND core layer).

Actually, I'm interested in this NAND framework refining work. And I
know you already
gave a speech on ELC about this. But due to the resource limitation, I may not
to do all of the things. So how about I continue my BBT patch with
your NAND refining
ideas. I'll try to make the BBT patch compatible with the refining
work. What do you
think?

Thanks,
Peter Pan

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ