On 03/11/2016 07:44 PM, Jagan Teki wrote: > On 12 March 2016 at 00:03, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >> On 03/11/2016 07:07 PM, Jagan Teki wrote: >>> On 11 March 2016 at 23:32, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>>> On 03/11/2016 06:34 PM, Jagan Teki wrote: >>>>> On 11 March 2016 at 17:59, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>>>>> On 03/11/2016 07:39 AM, Jagan Teki wrote: >>>>>>> On 11 March 2016 at 07:50, Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: >>>>>>>> The stm_is_locked_sr() function is picked from Linux kernel. For reason >>>>>>>> unknown, the 64bit data types used by the function and present in Linux >>>>>>>> were replaced with 32bit unsigned ones, which causes trouble. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The testcase performed was done using ST M25P80 chip. >>>>>>>> The command used was: >>>>>>>> => sf protect unlock 0 0x10000 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The call chain starts in stm_unlock(), which calls stm_is_locked_sr() >>>>>>>> with negative ofs argument. This works fine in Linux, where the "ofs" >>>>>>>> is loff_t, which is signed long long, while this fails in U-Boot, where >>>>>>>> "ofs" is u32 (unsigned int). Because of this signedness problem, the >>>>>>>> expression past the return statement to be incorrectly evaluated to 1, >>>>>>>> which in turn propagates back to stm_unlock() and results in -EINVAL. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The correction is very simple, just use the correctly sized data types >>>>>>>> with correct signedness in the function to make it work as intended. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> >>>>>>>> Cc: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> >>>>>>>> Cc: Jagan Teki <jt...@openedev.com> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash.c | 6 +++--- >>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash.c b/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash.c >>>>>>>> index 2ae2e3c..44d9e9b 100644 >>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash.c >>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi/spi_flash.c >>>>>>>> @@ -665,7 +665,7 @@ int sst_write_bp(struct spi_flash *flash, u32 >>>>>>>> offset, size_t len, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> #if defined(CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_STMICRO) || defined(CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_SST) >>>>>>>> static void stm_get_locked_range(struct spi_flash *flash, u8 sr, >>>>>>>> loff_t *ofs, >>>>>>>> - u32 *len) >>>>>>>> + u64 *len) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What about uint64_t? >>>>>> >>>>>> This is now same as Linux too. >>>>> >>>>> I couldn't find it on l2-mtd and ML as well, it is still uint64_t >>>>> >>>> You are not supposed to use stdint.h types in either kernel or u-boot if >>>> this is what you are concerned about. Thus, u64. >>> >>> No, I'm saying Linux is still using uint64_t and why can't we use the same? >>> >> Very quick google search gets you for example here: >> >> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/259313 >> >> Quote: >> " >> In short: having the kernel use the same names as user space is ACTIVELY >> BAD, exactly because those names have standards-defined visibility, >> which means that the kernel _cannot_ use them in all places anyway. So >> don't even _try_. >> " > > Yes, clear I knew this too - but this protect code is a copy from > Linux it better to be the same. ie only my concern.
Thus, linux should be fixed. -- Best regards, Marek Vasut _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
