[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210402105154.0a2a3af5@collabora.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2021 10:51:54 +0200
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
To: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
Cc: miquel.raynal@...tlin.com, richard@....at, vigneshr@...com,
robh+dt@...nel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Daniele.Palmas@...it.com,
bjorn.andersson@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 3/4] mtd: rawnand: Add support for secure regions in
NAND memory
On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 21:46:22 +0530
Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 05:54:21PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 20:49:54 +0530
> > Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org> wrote:
> >
> > > @@ -565,6 +608,11 @@ static int nand_block_isreserved(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t ofs)
> > >
> > > if (!chip->bbt)
> > > return 0;
> > > +
> > > + /* Check if the region is secured */
> > > + if (nand_region_is_secured(chip, ofs, 0))
> > > + return -EIO;
> >
> > That would is still wrong, you should never pass a 0 size to
> > nand_region_is_secured().
> >
>
> Size doesn't matter here, that's why I passed 0. Maybe 1 would be
> appropriate?
You're checking if a block is reserved, so I think passing the
eraseblock size would make more sense, but I actually don't understand
why you need to check if the region is secure here (looks like
nand_block_isreserved() does not access the flash).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists