WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.Updated in V2 patch , as Manivannan suggested.
Hi Manivannan,
mani@xxxxxxxxxx wrote on Thu, 14 Apr 2022 20:09:07 +0530:
On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 02:42:36PM +0200, Miquel Raynal wrote:Much better approach, yes.
Hi Md,Or we could move the bam reallocation inside qcom_nand_attach_chip() as below?
quic_mdalam@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Thu, 14 Apr 2022 17:50:48 +0530:
Why don't you update the sg table after increasing max_cwperpage?Hi Md,Currently we are updating max_cwperpage in qcom_nand_attach_chip(), but we are seeing issue for Hynix nand device since nand_scan_tail() is getting called after nand_attach() and in nand_attach() we are updating max_cwperpage to 4 or 8 based on page size.
quic_mdalam@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Thu, 14 Apr 2022 11:09:33 +0530:
This patch fixes a memory corruption that occurred in theThanks for investigating!
nand_scan() path for Hynix nand device.
On boot, for Hynix nand device will panic at a weird place:
| Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual
address 00000070
| [00000070] *pgd=00000000
| Internal error: Oops: 5 [#1] PREEMPT SMP ARM Modules linked in:
| CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.17.0-01473-g13ae1769cfb0
#38
| Hardware name: Generic DT based system PC is at
| nandc_set_reg+0x8/0x1c LR is at qcom_nandc_command+0x20c/0x5d0
| pc : [<c088b74c>] lr : [<c088d9c8>] psr: 00000113
| sp : c14adc50 ip : c14ee208 fp : c0cc970c
| r10: 000000a3 r9 : 00000000 r8 : 00000040
| r7 : c16f6a00 r6 : 00000090 r5 : 00000004 r4 :c14ee040
| r3 : 00000000 r2 : 0000000b r1 : 00000000 r0 :c14ee040
| Flags: nzcv IRQs on FIQs on Mode SVC_32 ISA ARM Segment none
| Control: 10c5387d Table: 8020406a DAC: 00000051 Register r0
| information: slab kmalloc-2k start c14ee000 pointer offset
64 size 2048
| Process swapper/0 (pid: 1, stack limit = 0x(ptrval)) nandc_set_reg
| from qcom_nandc_command+0x20c/0x5d0 qcom_nandc_command from
| nand_readid_op+0x198/0x1e8 nand_readid_op from
| hynix_nand_has_valid_jedecid+0x30/0x78
| hynix_nand_has_valid_jedecid from hynix_nand_init+0xb8/0x454
| hynix_nand_init from nand_scan_with_ids+0xa30/0x14a8
| nand_scan_with_ids from qcom_nandc_probe+0x648/0x7b0
| qcom_nandc_probe from platform_probe+0x58/0xac
The problem is that the nand_scan()'s qcom_nand_attach_chip callback
is updating the nandc->max_cwperpage from 1 to 4.This causes the
sg_init_table of clear_bam_transaction() in the driver's
qcom_nandc_command() to memset much more than what was initially
allocated by alloc_bam_transaction().
This patch will update nandc->max_cwperpage 1 to 4 after nand_scan()The fix does not look right, as far as I understand, this should be properly handled during the attach phase. That is where we have all information about the chip and do the configuration for this chip.
returns, and remove updating nandc->max_cwperpage from
qcom_nand_attach_chip call back.
If you update max_cwperpage there you should probably update other internal variables that depend on it as well.
From nand_scan_tail() there is a call for nand_manufacturer_init() , specific to Hynix nand read_id is getting called that's why we are seeing this issue only for Hynix nand device. Read id sequence as below
hynix_nand_has_valid_jedecid()
|
nand_readid_op()
|
qcom_nandc_command()
|
pre_command()
|
clear_bam_transaction() --> In this call we are doing sg_init_table() which is calling memset() based on max_cwperpage.Since initially we have allocated bam transaction as per max_cwperpage =1 and , since nand_chip_attach() updated max_cwperpage, now we are doing memset as per max_cwperpage = 4 or 8.
So anyway we have to updated max_cwperpage after nand_scan() call only. Since there is no other dependency on max_cwperpage in nand_attach_chip() and we are using this in bam_alloc() and bam_clear().
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
index 7c6efa3b6255..58c16054630f 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/qcom_nandc.c
@@ -2653,9 +2653,23 @@ static int qcom_nand_attach_chip(struct nand_chip *chip)
mtd_set_ooblayout(mtd, &qcom_nand_ooblayout_ops);
+ /* Free the initially allocated BAM transaction for reading the ONFI params */
+ if (nandc->props->is_bam)
+ free_bam_transaction(nandc);
+
nandc->max_cwperpage = max_t(unsigned int, nandc->max_cwperpage,
cwperpage);
+ /* Now allocate the BAM transaction based on updated max_cwperpage */
+ if (nandc->props->is_bam) {
+ nandc->bam_txn = alloc_bam_transaction(nandc);
+ if (!nandc->bam_txn) {
+ dev_err(nandc->dev,
+ "failed to allocate bam transaction\n");
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ }
+ }
+
/*
* DATA_UD_BYTES varies based on whether the read/write command protects
* spare data with ECC too. We protect spare data by default, so we set
@@ -2956,17 +2970,6 @@ static int qcom_nand_host_init_and_register(struct qcom_nand_controller *nandc,
if (ret)
return ret;
- if (nandc->props->is_bam) {
- free_bam_transaction(nandc);
- nandc->bam_txn = alloc_bam_transaction(nandc);
- if (!nandc->bam_txn) {
- dev_err(nandc->dev,
- "failed to allocate bam transaction\n");
- nand_cleanup(chip);
- return -ENOMEM;
- }
- }
-
ret = mtd_device_parse_register(mtd, probes, NULL, NULL, 0);
if (ret)
nand_cleanup(chip);
Thanks,
Mani
Thanks,
Miquèl