From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7BA2ECDE43 for ; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 08:29:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 849FE2083E for ; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 08:29:52 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 849FE2083E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=amlogic.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727081AbeJSQex (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Oct 2018 12:34:53 -0400 Received: from mail-sz2.amlogic.com ([211.162.65.114]:61290 "EHLO mail-sz2.amlogic.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726609AbeJSQex (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Oct 2018 12:34:53 -0400 Received: from [10.28.18.51] (10.28.18.51) by mail-sz2.amlogic.com (10.28.11.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 16:29:39 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] mtd: rawnand: meson: add support for Amlogic NAND flash controller To: Boris Brezillon , Jianxin Pan CC: , Yixun Lan , David Woodhouse , Brian Norris , Marek Vasut , Richard Weinberger , Jerome Brunet , Neil Armstrong , Martin Blumenstingl , Carlo Caione , Kevin Hilman , Rob Herring , Jian Hu , Hanjie Lin , Victor Wan , , , References: <1539839345-14021-1-git-send-email-jianxin.pan@amlogic.com> <1539839345-14021-3-git-send-email-jianxin.pan@amlogic.com> <20181018225009.59d94aee@bbrezillon> From: Liang Yang Message-ID: <695f6a8b-d37b-bc57-215b-eb6c36252a80@amlogic.com> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 16:29:40 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181018225009.59d94aee@bbrezillon> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.28.18.51] X-ClientProxiedBy: mail-sz2.amlogic.com (10.28.11.6) To mail-sz2.amlogic.com (10.28.11.6) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2018/10/19 4:50, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:09:05 +0800 > Jianxin Pan wrote: > >> +static int meson_nfc_buffer_init(struct mtd_info *mtd) >> +{ >> + struct nand_chip *nand = mtd_to_nand(mtd); >> + struct meson_nfc *nfc = nand_get_controller_data(nand); >> + static int max_page_bytes, max_info_bytes; >> + int page_bytes, info_bytes; >> + int nsectors; >> + >> + nsectors = mtd->writesize / nand->ecc.size; >> + page_bytes = mtd->writesize + mtd->oobsize; >> + info_bytes = nsectors * PER_INFO_BYTE; >> + >> + if (nfc->data_buf && nfc->info_buf) { >> + if (max_page_bytes < page_bytes) >> + meson_nfc_free_buffer(nfc); >> + else >> + return 0; >> + } >> + >> + max_page_bytes = max_t(int, max_page_bytes, page_bytes); >> + max_info_bytes = max_t(int, max_info_bytes, info_bytes); >> + >> + nfc->data_buf = kmalloc(max_page_bytes, GFP_KERNEL); > > Is there a good reason for not using chip->data_buf and allocating a > new buffer here? > when calling read_oob or write_oob, i need a mid-buffer which is used in meson_nfc_prase_data_oob(). i.e. after reading a page data into nfc->data_buf, I will format it and transfer to chip->data_buf. >> + if (!nfc->data_buf) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + nfc->info_buf = kmalloc(max_info_bytes, GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!nfc->info_buf) { >> + kfree(nfc->data_buf); >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + } > > I'd recommend moving this info_buf in the priv chip struct, otherwise > you'll have to protect nfc->info_buf with a lock to prevent an already > register chip from using this pointer while you're reallocating the > buffer. Also, I think you have a memleak here. > ok, i will move it in the chip struct . but how memleak happens even i have called meson_nfc_free_buffer before and free data_buf if info_buf alloc faied. >> + >> + return 0; >> +} > > . > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: liang.yang@amlogic.com (Liang Yang) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 16:29:40 +0800 Subject: [PATCH v5 2/2] mtd: rawnand: meson: add support for Amlogic NAND flash controller In-Reply-To: <20181018225009.59d94aee@bbrezillon> References: <1539839345-14021-1-git-send-email-jianxin.pan@amlogic.com> <1539839345-14021-3-git-send-email-jianxin.pan@amlogic.com> <20181018225009.59d94aee@bbrezillon> Message-ID: <695f6a8b-d37b-bc57-215b-eb6c36252a80@amlogic.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 2018/10/19 4:50, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:09:05 +0800 > Jianxin Pan wrote: > >> +static int meson_nfc_buffer_init(struct mtd_info *mtd) >> +{ >> + struct nand_chip *nand = mtd_to_nand(mtd); >> + struct meson_nfc *nfc = nand_get_controller_data(nand); >> + static int max_page_bytes, max_info_bytes; >> + int page_bytes, info_bytes; >> + int nsectors; >> + >> + nsectors = mtd->writesize / nand->ecc.size; >> + page_bytes = mtd->writesize + mtd->oobsize; >> + info_bytes = nsectors * PER_INFO_BYTE; >> + >> + if (nfc->data_buf && nfc->info_buf) { >> + if (max_page_bytes < page_bytes) >> + meson_nfc_free_buffer(nfc); >> + else >> + return 0; >> + } >> + >> + max_page_bytes = max_t(int, max_page_bytes, page_bytes); >> + max_info_bytes = max_t(int, max_info_bytes, info_bytes); >> + >> + nfc->data_buf = kmalloc(max_page_bytes, GFP_KERNEL); > > Is there a good reason for not using chip->data_buf and allocating a > new buffer here? > when calling read_oob or write_oob, i need a mid-buffer which is used in meson_nfc_prase_data_oob(). i.e. after reading a page data into nfc->data_buf, I will format it and transfer to chip->data_buf. >> + if (!nfc->data_buf) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + nfc->info_buf = kmalloc(max_info_bytes, GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!nfc->info_buf) { >> + kfree(nfc->data_buf); >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + } > > I'd recommend moving this info_buf in the priv chip struct, otherwise > you'll have to protect nfc->info_buf with a lock to prevent an already > register chip from using this pointer while you're reallocating the > buffer. Also, I think you have a memleak here. > ok, i will move it in the chip struct . but how memleak happens even i have called meson_nfc_free_buffer before and free data_buf if info_buf alloc faied. >> + >> + return 0; >> +} > > . > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: liang.yang@amlogic.com (Liang Yang) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 16:29:40 +0800 Subject: [PATCH v5 2/2] mtd: rawnand: meson: add support for Amlogic NAND flash controller In-Reply-To: <20181018225009.59d94aee@bbrezillon> References: <1539839345-14021-1-git-send-email-jianxin.pan@amlogic.com> <1539839345-14021-3-git-send-email-jianxin.pan@amlogic.com> <20181018225009.59d94aee@bbrezillon> Message-ID: <695f6a8b-d37b-bc57-215b-eb6c36252a80@amlogic.com> To: linus-amlogic@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linus-amlogic.lists.infradead.org On 2018/10/19 4:50, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:09:05 +0800 > Jianxin Pan wrote: > >> +static int meson_nfc_buffer_init(struct mtd_info *mtd) >> +{ >> + struct nand_chip *nand = mtd_to_nand(mtd); >> + struct meson_nfc *nfc = nand_get_controller_data(nand); >> + static int max_page_bytes, max_info_bytes; >> + int page_bytes, info_bytes; >> + int nsectors; >> + >> + nsectors = mtd->writesize / nand->ecc.size; >> + page_bytes = mtd->writesize + mtd->oobsize; >> + info_bytes = nsectors * PER_INFO_BYTE; >> + >> + if (nfc->data_buf && nfc->info_buf) { >> + if (max_page_bytes < page_bytes) >> + meson_nfc_free_buffer(nfc); >> + else >> + return 0; >> + } >> + >> + max_page_bytes = max_t(int, max_page_bytes, page_bytes); >> + max_info_bytes = max_t(int, max_info_bytes, info_bytes); >> + >> + nfc->data_buf = kmalloc(max_page_bytes, GFP_KERNEL); > > Is there a good reason for not using chip->data_buf and allocating a > new buffer here? > when calling read_oob or write_oob, i need a mid-buffer which is used in meson_nfc_prase_data_oob(). i.e. after reading a page data into nfc->data_buf, I will format it and transfer to chip->data_buf. >> + if (!nfc->data_buf) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + >> + nfc->info_buf = kmalloc(max_info_bytes, GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!nfc->info_buf) { >> + kfree(nfc->data_buf); >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + } > > I'd recommend moving this info_buf in the priv chip struct, otherwise > you'll have to protect nfc->info_buf with a lock to prevent an already > register chip from using this pointer while you're reallocating the > buffer. Also, I think you have a memleak here. > ok, i will move it in the chip struct . but how memleak happens even i have called meson_nfc_free_buffer before and free data_buf if info_buf alloc faied. >> + >> + return 0; >> +} > > . >