linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] mmc: cavium: Remove redundant if-statement checkup

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:   Thu, 29 Apr 2021 22:30:17 +0200
From:   Bean Huo <huobean@...il.com>
To:     Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc:     rric@...nel.org, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Bean Huo (beanhuo)" <beanhuo@...ron.com>,
        "# 4.0+" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] mmc: cavium: Remove redundant if-statement
 checkup

On Fri, 2021-03-19 at 16:42 +0100, Bean Huo wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-03-19 at 15:09 +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 at 13:14, Bean Huo <huobean@...il.com> wrote:
> > > From: Bean Huo <beanhuo@...ron.com>
> > > Currently, we have two ways to issue multiple-block read/write
> > > the
> > > command to the eMMC. One is by normal IO request path fs->block-
> > > > mmc.
> > > Another one is that we can issue multiple-block read/write
> > > through
> > > MMC ioctl interface. For the first path, mrq->stop, and mrq-
> > > >stop-
> > > > opcode
> > > will be initialized in mmc_blk_data_prep(). However, for the
> > > second
> > > IO
> > > path, mrq->stop is not initialized since it is a pre-defined
> > > multiple
> > > blocks read/write.
> > As a matter of fact this way is also supported for the regular
> > block
> > I/O path. To make the mmc block driver to use it, mmc host drivers
> > need to announce that it's supported by setting MMC_CAP_CMD23.
> > It looks like that is what your patch should be targeted towards,
> > can
> > you have a look at this instead?
> 
> 
> Hi Ulf,
> 
> Thanks for your comments. I will look at that as your suggestion.
> 
> The patch [1/2] is accepted, so I will just update this patch to
> 
> the next version.
> 
> 
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Bean


Hi Uffe,
Could you please firstly accept this patch? let the customer update
their kernel. As I tried to develop the next version of the patch
according to your suggestion, more changes will be involved. Also, no
matter how to make the change general, below mrq->stop checkup should
be deleted since it is obsolete. In the data transmission completion
interrupt, mrq->stop will be checked again.

-	if (!mrq->data || !mrq->data->sg || !mrq->data->sg_len ||
-	    !mrq->stop || mrq->stop->opcode != MMC_STOP_TRANSMISSION) {
+	if (!mrq->data || !mrq->data->sg || !mrq->data->sg_len) {


Kind regards
Bean