在 2021-10-19星期二的 17:23 +0200，Heinrich Schuchardt写道：
On 10/19/21 15:35, zhaohui.shi wrote:
From: schspa schspa@gmail.com
In some case, get_info() interface can be NULL, add this check to stop from crash.
Thank you for reviewing the partition driver code.
There seems to be no driver missing a get_info implementation. Where did you run into a problem?
Yes, I do run into a problem, In my spl build, CONFIG_SPL_FS_EXT4, CONFIG_SPL_FS_FAT, CONFIG_SYS_MMCSD_RAW_MODE_U_BOOT_PARTITION are all not enabled. In this case, get_info implementation is NULL. see 'part_get_info_ptr' and 'part_print_ptr' and part_efi.c for detail.
Why should we only check .get_info and not .test and not .print?
All part type driver have .test implementation, it can't be NULL, and .print have NULL pointer judgement already.
Signed-off-by: schspa schspa@gmail.com
Please, provide a name.
disk/part.c | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/disk/part.c b/disk/part.c index a6a8f7052b..7af3240ec7 100644 --- a/disk/part.c +++ b/disk/part.c @@ -668,6 +668,13 @@ int part_get_info_by_name_type(struct blk_desc *dev_desc, const char *name, part_drv = part_driver_lookup_type(dev_desc); if (!part_drv) return -1;
+ if (!part_drv->get_info) { + PRINTF("## Driver %s does not have the get_info() method\n", + part_drv->name);
Please, use log_debug() to avoid noise on the console on every boot.
I think it's OK to use PRINTF, because of this BUG occurs only when user give a bad part configuration, and this error message can prompt the user that a configuration error has occurred. Besides, 'part_get_info' use PRINTF for this null pointer protection too.
Best regards
Heinrich
+ return -ENOSYS; + }
for (i = 1; i < part_drv->max_entries; i++) { ret = part_drv->get_info(dev_desc, i, info); if (ret != 0) {