linux-kernel - [RFC PATCH 1/2] mtd: rawnand: handle ONFI revision number field being 0

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: <20180618045255.8015-2-chris.packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz>
Date:   Mon, 18 Jun 2018 16:52:54 +1200
From:   Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
To:     miquel.raynal@...tlin.com, boris.brezillon@...tlin.com,
        dwmw2@...radead.org, computersforpeace@...il.com,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mtd: rawnand: handle ONFI revision number field being 0

Some Micron NAND chips (MT29F1G08ABAFAWP-ITE:F) report 00 00 for the
revision number field of the ONFI parameter page. Rather than rejecting
these outright assume ONFI version 1.0 if the revision number is 00 00.

Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
---
At the moment I haven't qualified this check on anything, I should
probably at least include vendor == MICRON.

As far as I can tell revision number == 0 is not permitted by the ONFI
spec but this wouldn't be the first time a vendor has ignored a spec. On
the other hand maybe I'm reading the spec wrong and someone here will
say "oh 0 means ...".

 drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
index 0cd3e216b95c..1691c7005ae4 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
@@ -5184,6 +5184,8 @@ static int nand_flash_detect_onfi(struct nand_chip *chip)
 		chip->parameters.onfi.version = 20;
 	else if (val & (1 << 1))
 		chip->parameters.onfi.version = 10;
+	else if (val == 0)
+		chip->parameters.onfi.version = 10;
 
 	if (!chip->parameters.onfi.version) {
 		pr_info("unsupported ONFI version: %d\n", val);
-- 
2.17.1