| Message ID | 20170409161717.0f59bc9d@bbrezillon |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable |
| Headers | show |
Hi Boris, 2017-04-09 23:17 GMT+09:00 Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>: > On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:15:04 +0900 > Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> wrote: > >> Some NAND controllers are using DMA engine requiring a specific >> buffer alignment. The core provides no guarantee on the nand_buffers >> pointers, which forces some drivers to allocate their own buffers >> and pass the NAND_OWN_BUFFERS flag. >> >> Rework the nand_buffers allocation logic to allocate each buffer >> independently. This should make most NAND controllers/DMA engine >> happy, and allow us to get rid of these custom buf allocation in >> NAND controller drivers. >> >> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> >> --- >> >> Changes in v3: >> - Reword git-log >> >> Changes in v2: >> - Newly added >> >> drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- >> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c >> index f828ad7..e9d3195 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c >> @@ -4613,13 +4613,25 @@ int nand_scan_tail(struct mtd_info *mtd) >> } >> >> if (!(chip->options & NAND_OWN_BUFFERS)) { >> - nbuf = kzalloc(sizeof(*nbuf) + mtd->writesize >> - + mtd->oobsize * 3, GFP_KERNEL); >> + nbuf = kzalloc(sizeof(*nbuf), GFP_KERNEL); >> if (!nbuf) >> return -ENOMEM; >> - nbuf->ecccalc = (uint8_t *)(nbuf + 1); >> - nbuf->ecccode = nbuf->ecccalc + mtd->oobsize; >> - nbuf->databuf = nbuf->ecccode + mtd->oobsize; >> + nbuf->ecccalc = kmalloc(mtd->oobsize, GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!nbuf->ecccalc) { >> + ret = -EINVAL; >> + goto err_free; > > You have a memory leak here, because chip->buffers = nbuf is only done > after all allocations have succeeded. Indeed. >> + } >> + nbuf->ecccode = kmalloc(mtd->oobsize, GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!nbuf->ecccode) { >> + ret = -EINVAL; > > ret = -ENOMEM; > > I have the following fixup patch, let me know if you're okay with it > and I'll squash it in the original commit. Thank you for your fixup patch. The code-diff looks all good. Please squash this. Sorry for my many mistakes.
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c index 23a415d1f124..ed49a1d634b0 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c @@ -4501,7 +4501,7 @@ int nand_scan_tail(struct mtd_info *mtd) { struct nand_chip *chip = mtd_to_nand(mtd); struct nand_ecc_ctrl *ecc = &chip->ecc; - struct nand_buffers *nbuf; + struct nand_buffers *nbuf = NULL; int ret; /* New bad blocks should be marked in OOB, flash-based BBT, or both */ @@ -4518,20 +4518,23 @@ int nand_scan_tail(struct mtd_info *mtd) nbuf = kzalloc(sizeof(*nbuf), GFP_KERNEL); if (!nbuf) return -ENOMEM; + nbuf->ecccalc = kmalloc(mtd->oobsize, GFP_KERNEL); if (!nbuf->ecccalc) { - ret = -EINVAL; + ret = -ENOMEM; goto err_free; } + nbuf->ecccode = kmalloc(mtd->oobsize, GFP_KERNEL); if (!nbuf->ecccode) { - ret = -EINVAL; + ret = -ENOMEM; goto err_free; } + nbuf->databuf = kmalloc(mtd->writesize + mtd->oobsize, GFP_KERNEL); if (!nbuf->databuf) { - ret = -EINVAL; + ret = -ENOMEM; goto err_free; } @@ -4773,11 +4776,11 @@ int nand_scan_tail(struct mtd_info *mtd) /* Build bad block table */ return chip->scan_bbt(mtd); err_free: - if (!(chip->options & NAND_OWN_BUFFERS)) { - kfree(chip->buffers->databuf); - kfree(chip->buffers->ecccode); - kfree(chip->buffers->ecccalc); - kfree(chip->buffers); + if (nbuf) { + kfree(nbuf->databuf); + kfree(nbuf->ecccode); + kfree(nbuf->ecccalc); + kfree(nbuf); } return ret; } @@ -4829,7 +4832,7 @@ void nand_cleanup(struct nand_chip *chip) /* Free bad block table memory */ kfree(chip->bbt); - if (!(chip->options & NAND_OWN_BUFFERS)) { + if (!(chip->options & NAND_OWN_BUFFERS) && chip->buffers) { kfree(chip->buffers->databuf); kfree(chip->buffers->ecccode); kfree(chip->buffers->ecccalc);