Hi Michael, thanks for kind review!
On 2025/04/12 19:01, Michael van Elst wrote:
On Sat, Apr 12, 2025 at 06:24:44PM +0900, Rin Okuyama wrote:
Hi!
I've made a draft patch to support dumping against > 2Gi blocks
for backends like nvme(4) or virtio(4).
Does it look reasonable to you?
Hi rin,
- if (blkno < 0 || blkno + nblk - 1 > INT_MAX)
+ if (blkno < 0 ||
+ ((sc->sc_flags & LDF_BLOCK32) != 0 && blkno + nblk > UINT32_MAX))
return (EIO);
I think the check for the upper bound needs to be like I wrote it so
that the last block written doesn't exceed the maximum signed int value.
Sorry, I should have mentioned this part in the previous message.
Thank you again for your careful check.
Some H/W seems to accept uint32_t address, but, yes, you are right.
Safer is better; I cannot check every datasheet.
IMO, LDF_BLOCK32 flag bit should mean H/W capability, not software
restriction. I will remove the flag, and move the second check into
each driver.
Off-by-one was introduced by my thinko ;)
PS
For ld_sdmmc.c, IIUC, check for ld_sdmmc_dump() yields
```
if (blkno + blkcnt - 1 > sc->sc_sf->csd.capacity)
return EIO;
```
Is this correct?
If so, shouldn't we take into account b_bcount for ld_sdmmc_dobio()?
https://nxr.netbsd.org/xref/src/sys/dev/sdmmc/ld_sdmmc.c#458
Thanks,
rin
Otherwise it looks ok.
The current version (check only) could be pulled up. The changed
backend ABI would require more compat code.
Greetings,
