Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:5 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:5;
Message-ID: <bd8c4e2b-2538-11d9-ed5c-34cd302703e2@huawei.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Sep 2023 09:08:07 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.2
Subject: Re: [RFC] mtd: Fix error code loss in mtdchar_read() function.
To:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
CC:     Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
        linux-mtd <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        chengzhihao1 <chengzhihao1@huawei.com>,
        yi zhang <yi.zhang@huawei.com>,
        yangerkun <yangerkun@huawei.com>
References: <20230923005856.2538223-1-wangzhaolong1@huawei.com>
 <1131184426.81026.1695650583370.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
 <20230925163727.7ecebe9a@xps-13>
 <488305749.81257.1695653971403.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
 <20230925170642.089e543b@xps-13>
From:   ZhaoLong Wang <wangzhaolong1@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230925170642.089e543b@xps-13>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


> richard@nod.at wrote on Mon, 25 Sep 2023 16:59:31 +0200 (CEST):
>
>> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
>>> Von: "Miquel Raynal" <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
>>>> Given this a second thought. I don't think a NAND driver is allowed to return
>>>> less than requests bytes and setting EBADMSG.
>>>> UBI's IO path has a comment on that:
>>>>
>>>>                  /*
>>>>                   * The driver should never return -EBADMSG if it failed to read
>>>>                   * all the requested data. But some buggy drivers might do
>>>>                   * this, so we change it to -EIO.
>>>>                   */
>>>>                  if (read != len && mtd_is_eccerr(err)) {
>>>>                          ubi_assert(0);
>>>>                          err = -EIO;
>>>>                  }
>>> Interesting. Shall we add this check to the mtd_read() path as well?
>>>
>>> Maybe with a WARN_ON()?
>> WARN_ON_ONCE(), please. But yes, let's add it.
> Zhaolong, can you take care of it?
>
>> Thanks,
>> //richard
>
> Thanks,
> Miquèl


Yes！That is a good idea, and I am pleased to do this.

Thanks,
Zhaolong