linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] ubi: gluebi: Fix NULL pointer dereference caused by ftl notifier

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1641029267.251608.1718640023954.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 18:00:23 +0200 (CEST)
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: Gagan Sidhu <broly@....com>
Cc: ZhaoLong Wang <wangzhaolong1@...wei.com>, 
	Artem Bityutskiy <Artem.Bityutskiy@...ia.com>, 
	chengzhihao1 <chengzhihao1@...wei.com>, 
	dpervushin <dpervushin@...eddedalley.com>, 
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	linux-mtd <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, 
	Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, 
	Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>, 
	yangerkun <yangerkun@...wei.com>, yi zhang <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ubi: gluebi: Fix NULL pointer dereference caused by
 ftl notifier

----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> Von: "Gagan Sidhu" <broly@....com>
> yes, i have a squashfs inside a ubi volume, and i create ubi block device from
> it.
> 
> i do use config_mtd_ubi_block because the filesystem is squashfs.
> 
> so i think it’s affirmative to both questions. gluebi for the block device from
> the ubi.fs file, then config_mtd_ubi_block to mount this read-only filesystem
> as a block device.
> 
> the end result of both options is a read-only block device that can handle bad
> blocks on nand devices.
> 
> if i was using an M25P80, i wouldn’t even be using ubi.
> 
> so CONFIG_MTD_UBI_{GLUEBI,BLOCK} are handy for cases where you need an mtd block
> device with a read-only file system where the UBI takes care of the
> idiosyncrasies that make NAND (imo, ofc) inferior to SPI

Isn't MTD -> UBI -> GLUBI -> MTD -> MTDBLOCK performance wise a nightmare?
We have UBIBlock for this use case.

Thanks,
//richard