Re: [PATCH v3 33/37] mtd: nand: allocate aligned buffers if NAND_OWN_BUFFERS is unset

From: Masahiro Yamada
Date: Sun Apr 09 2017 - 20:20:44 EST


Hi Boris,


2017-04-09 23:17 GMT+09:00 Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 17:15:04 +0900
> Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Some NAND controllers are using DMA engine requiring a specific
>> buffer alignment. The core provides no guarantee on the nand_buffers
>> pointers, which forces some drivers to allocate their own buffers
>> and pass the NAND_OWN_BUFFERS flag.
>>
>> Rework the nand_buffers allocation logic to allocate each buffer
>> independently. This should make most NAND controllers/DMA engine
>> happy, and allow us to get rid of these custom buf allocation in
>> NAND controller drivers.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes in v3:
>> - Reword git-log
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Newly added
>>
>> drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
>> index f828ad7..e9d3195 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
>> @@ -4613,13 +4613,25 @@ int nand_scan_tail(struct mtd_info *mtd)
>> }
>>
>> if (!(chip->options & NAND_OWN_BUFFERS)) {
>> - nbuf = kzalloc(sizeof(*nbuf) + mtd->writesize
>> - + mtd->oobsize * 3, GFP_KERNEL);
>> + nbuf = kzalloc(sizeof(*nbuf), GFP_KERNEL);
>> if (!nbuf)
>> return -ENOMEM;
>> - nbuf->ecccalc = (uint8_t *)(nbuf + 1);
>> - nbuf->ecccode = nbuf->ecccalc + mtd->oobsize;
>> - nbuf->databuf = nbuf->ecccode + mtd->oobsize;
>> + nbuf->ecccalc = kmalloc(mtd->oobsize, GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (!nbuf->ecccalc) {
>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>> + goto err_free;
>
> You have a memory leak here, because chip->buffers = nbuf is only done
> after all allocations have succeeded.


Indeed.


>> + }
>> + nbuf->ecccode = kmalloc(mtd->oobsize, GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (!nbuf->ecccode) {
>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>
> ret = -ENOMEM;
>
> I have the following fixup patch, let me know if you're okay with it
> and I'll squash it in the original commit.


Thank you for your fixup patch. The code-diff looks all good.
Please squash this.

Sorry for my many mistakes.







--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada