Even if SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE was specified at flash declaration, the erase type of size nor->info->sector_size was incorrectly set as supported. Don't set erase types when SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE is set.
Fixes: b199489d37b2 ("mtd: spi-nor: add the framework for SPI NOR") Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus tudor.ambarus@microchip.com Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org --- v2: - add comment, update commit message, split change in individual commit - add fixes tag and cc to stable.
drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c index b4f141ad9c9c..64cf7b9df621 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c @@ -2392,6 +2392,10 @@ static void spi_nor_no_sfdp_init_params(struct spi_nor *nor) SPINOR_OP_PP, SNOR_PROTO_8_8_8_DTR); }
+ /* Skip setting erase types when SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE is set. */ + if (nor->info->flags & SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE) + return; + /* * Sector Erase settings. Sort Erase Types in ascending order, with the * smallest erase size starting at BIT(0).
On 08/03/22 11:11AM, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
Even if SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE was specified at flash declaration, the erase type of size nor->info->sector_size was incorrectly set as supported. Don't set erase types when SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE is set.
Does this have any practical implications? Since we set MTD_NO_ERASE, erase should never be called for this flash anyway, right?
Fixes: b199489d37b2 ("mtd: spi-nor: add the framework for SPI NOR") Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus tudor.ambarus@microchip.com Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
v2:
- add comment, update commit message, split change in individual commit
- add fixes tag and cc to stable.
drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c index b4f141ad9c9c..64cf7b9df621 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c @@ -2392,6 +2392,10 @@ static void spi_nor_no_sfdp_init_params(struct spi_nor *nor) SPINOR_OP_PP, SNOR_PROTO_8_8_8_DTR); }
- /* Skip setting erase types when SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE is set. */
- if (nor->info->flags & SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE)
return;- /*
- Sector Erase settings. Sort Erase Types in ascending order, with the
- smallest erase size starting at BIT(0).
-- 2.25.1
On 02/04/22 01:35AM, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
On 08/03/22 11:11AM, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
Even if SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE was specified at flash declaration, the erase type of size nor->info->sector_size was incorrectly set as supported. Don't set erase types when SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE is set.
Does this have any practical implications? Since we set MTD_NO_ERASE, erase should never be called for this flash anyway, right?
Fixes: b199489d37b2 ("mtd: spi-nor: add the framework for SPI NOR") Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus tudor.ambarus@microchip.com Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
v2:
- add comment, update commit message, split change in individual commit
- add fixes tag and cc to stable.
drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c index b4f141ad9c9c..64cf7b9df621 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c @@ -2392,6 +2392,10 @@ static void spi_nor_no_sfdp_init_params(struct spi_nor *nor) SPINOR_OP_PP, SNOR_PROTO_8_8_8_DTR); }
- /* Skip setting erase types when SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE is set. */
- if (nor->info->flags & SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE)
return;
Can you instead do
if (!(nor->info->flags & SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE)) { ... }
This way when someone adds code to the bottom of this function that sets something other than erase types it will execute for flashes with SPI_NOR_NO_ERASE as well.
- /*
- Sector Erase settings. Sort Erase Types in ascending order, with the
- smallest erase size starting at BIT(0).
-- 2.25.1
-- Regards, Pratyush Yadav Texas Instruments Inc.
Linux MTD discussion mailing list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Pratyush Yadav -
Tudor Ambarus