[PATCH 1/3] mtd: cmdlinepart: make the partitions rule more strict
Shmulik Ladkani
shmulik.ladkani at gmail.com
Wed Sep 5 01:30:20 EDT 2012
On Wed, 5 Sep 2012 10:12:20 +0800 Huang Shijie <b32955 at freescale.com> wrote:
> yes, it's really simple and flexible.
> But I think it's not wise to export the 0-size partition to user.
> The user may confused at this.
>
> And the mtd-utils, such as mtd-info/mtd-debug, do they can work with a
> 0-size partition?
I think the 0 sized partition case is really seldom, don't worth the
trouble, the user will probably observe something went wrong in his
cmdline parts specification.
But nevertheless, if we think it's a MUST to forbid the 0 sized
partitions, then amend my patch as follows:
(sorry, didn't even compile tested this, please review and test, if the
approach is acceptible)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c b/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
index 17b0bd4..aed1b8a 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/cmdlinepart.c
@@ -319,12 +319,22 @@ static int parse_cmdline_partitions(struct mtd_info *master,
if (part->parts[i].size == SIZE_REMAINING)
part->parts[i].size = master->size - offset;
+ if (part->parts[i].size == 0) {
+ printk(KERN_WARNING ERRP
+ "%s: skipping zero sized partition\n",
+ part->mtd_id);
+ part->num_parts--;
+ memmove(&part->parts[i],
+ &part->parts[i + 1],
+ sizeof(*part->parts) * (part->num_parts - i));
+ continue;
+ }
+
if (offset + part->parts[i].size > master->size) {
printk(KERN_WARNING ERRP
"%s: partitioning exceeds flash size, truncating\n",
part->mtd_id);
part->parts[i].size = master->size - offset;
- part->num_parts = i;
}
offset += part->parts[i].size;
}
Also, I'll send a short coding cleanup patch, this loop's indent level
is horrible...
Regards,
Shmulik
More information about the linux-mtd
mailing list