Re: [PATCH v4] lib: sparse: Make CHUNK_TYPE_RAW buffer aligned
On 11/17/21 3:41 AM, qianfan wrote:
在 2021/11/16 23:05, Sean Anderson 写道:
On 11/15/21 8:35 PM, qianfanguijin@qq.com wrote:
From: qianfan Zhao qianfanguijin@163.com
CHUNK_TYPE_RAW buffer is not aligned, and flash sparse images by fastboot will report "Misaligned operation" if DCACHE is enabled.
Flashing Sparse Image CACHE: Misaligned operation at range [84000028, 84001028] CACHE: Misaligned operation at range [84001034, 84002034] CACHE: Misaligned operation at range [8401104c, 8401304c]
Fix it
Signed-off-by: qianfan Zhao qianfanguijin@163.com
lib/image-sparse.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/image-sparse.c b/lib/image-sparse.c index d80fdbbf58..5ec0f94ab3 100644 --- a/lib/image-sparse.c +++ b/lib/image-sparse.c @@ -46,9 +46,66 @@ #include <asm/cache.h> #include <linux/math64.h> +#include <linux/err.h> static void default_log(const char *ignored, char *response) {} +static lbaint_t write_sparse_chunk_raw(struct sparse_storage *info, + lbaint_t blk, lbaint_t blkcnt, + void *data, + char *response) +{ + lbaint_t n = blkcnt, write_blks, blks = 0, aligned_buf_blks = 100; + uint32_t *aligned_buf = NULL;
+ if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(SYS_DCACHE_OFF)) { + write_blks = info->write(info, blk, n, data); + if (write_blks < n) + goto write_fail;
+ return write_blks; + }
+ aligned_buf = memalign(ARCH_DMA_MINALIGN, info->blksz * aligned_buf_blks); + if (!aligned_buf) { + info->mssg("Malloc failed for: CHUNK_TYPE_RAW", response); + return -ENOMEM; + }
+ while (blkcnt > 0) { + n = min(aligned_buf_blks, blkcnt); + memcpy(aligned_buf, data, n * info->blksz);
+ /* write_blks might be > n due to NAND bad-blocks */
nit: <
This comment is misleading here, but it is actually correct. It is correct to write more that the specified number when nand flash bad blocks occur, so (write_blks >= n) is write successful. maybe rewrite the judge conditions like this is better?
Ah, you are right.
if (!(write_blks >= n))
+ write_blks = info->write(info, blk + blks, n, aligned_buf); + if (write_blks < n) { + free(aligned_buf); + goto write_fail; + }
+ blks += write_blks; + data += n * info->blksz; + blkcnt -= n; + }
+ free(aligned_buf); + return blks;
+write_fail:
I think this label can be lower, but it does not affect correctness.
sorry, could you please explain this clear, I can't understand.
+ if (IS_ERR_VALUE(write_blks)) { + printf("%s: Write failed, block #" LBAFU " [" LBAFU "] (%lld)\n", + __func__, blk + blks, n, (long long)write_blks); + info->mssg("flash write failure", response); + return write_blks; + }
The above label could be placed here, since you check the value of write_blks before jumping.
--Sean
+ /* write_blks < n */ + printf("%s: Write failed, block #" LBAFU " [" LBAFU "]\n", + __func__, blk + blks, n); + info->mssg("flash write failure(incomplete)", response); + return -1;
-EIO?
It's OK
+}
int write_sparse_image(struct sparse_storage *info, const char *part_name, void *data, char *response) { @@ -152,15 +209,11 @@ int write_sparse_image(struct sparse_storage *info, return -1; } - blks = info->write(info, blk, blkcnt, data); - /* blks might be > blkcnt (eg. NAND bad-blocks) */ - if (blks < blkcnt) { - printf("%s: %s" LBAFU " [" LBAFU "]\n", - __func__, "Write failed, block #", - blk, blks); - info->mssg("flash write failure", response); + blks = write_sparse_chunk_raw(info, blk, blkcnt, + data, response); + if (blks < 0) return -1;
ditto
It's OK
- }
blk += blks; bytes_written += ((u64)blkcnt) * info->blksz; total_blocks += chunk_header->chunk_sz;
Reviewed-by: Sean Anderson sean.anderson@seco.com
participants (1)
-
Sean Anderson