On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 21:35:57 +0200 Richard Weinberger <rich...@nod.at> wrote:
> Quentin, > > Am Donnerstag, 28. Juni 2018, 09:40:53 CEST schrieb Quentin Schulz: > > Now that we have the logic for skipping CRC check for static UBI volumes > > in the core, let's expose it to users. > > > > This makes use of a padding byte in the volume description data > > structure as a flag. This flag only tell for now whether we should skip > > the CRC check of a volume. > > > > This checks the UBI volume for which we are trying to skip the CRC check > > is static. > > > > Suggested-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezil...@bootlin.com> > > Signed-off-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.sch...@bootlin.com> > > Reviewed-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezil...@bootlin.com> > > --- > > drivers/mtd/ubi/cdev.c | 4 ++++ > > drivers/mtd/ubi/vmt.c | 3 +++ > > include/uapi/mtd/ubi-user.h | 16 ++++++++++++++-- > > 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/cdev.c b/drivers/mtd/ubi/cdev.c > > index 45c3296..3eea1df 100644 > > --- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/cdev.c > > +++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/cdev.c > > @@ -622,6 +622,10 @@ static int verify_mkvol_req(const struct ubi_device > > *ubi, > > req->vol_type != UBI_STATIC_VOLUME) > > goto bad; > > > > + if (req->flags & UBI_VOL_SKIP_CRC_CHECK_FLG && Oops, missed that req->flags & UBI_VOL_SKIP_CRC_CHECK_FLG check was missing parens (checkpatch --strict should complain about that). > > + req->vol_type != UBI_STATIC_VOLUME) > > + goto bad; > > We should also reject unknown flags here. I agree. Talking about missing checks, it seems that none of the padding sections are checked (I hope all mkvol users are zero-ing the struct as requested in ubi-user.h). And we should probably also check that vtbl->flags does not contain unknown flags.
