[flashrom] [PATCH 2/3] add check_block_erasers which returns the number of well-defined erasers for a chip

[Stefan Tauner]

On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 20:38:33 +0200
Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net> wrote:

> Am 30.06.2011 20:07 schrieb Carl-Daniel Hailfinger:
> > Am 30.06.2011 19:54 schrieb Carl-Daniel Hailfinger:  
> > With the changes outlined above:
> > Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net>
> >   
> 
> Ahem. I should have quoted the part where a new bug appears, and should
> have requested a fix for that.
> 
> >>> @@ -1814,13 +1824,13 @@ int chip_safety_check(struct flashchip
> >>> *flash, int force, int read_it, int write } if (erase_it ||
> >>> write_it) { /* Write needs erase. */ - if (flash->tested &
> >>> TEST_BAD_ERASE) { + if (flash->tested & TEST_BAD_ERASE && 
> 
> As discussed on IRC, this should be ||.
> 
> 
> >>> + !check_block_erasers(flash, 0)) { msg_cerr("Erase is not working
> >>> on this chip. "); if (!force) 
> 
> And once you switch to || above, you may get a segfault if no block
> erasers exist. Zero usable erase functions is a non-recoverable
> condition, it can not be overridden with --force.
> 
> We do perform that check for more than zero usable erase functions
> elsewhere already. Either move that check here (with a separate if
> statement, and add a comment in the original place that checking has
> moved), or leave it where it is and keep the code here as is.

i dont understand what you are talking about. the erasers are allocated
no matter if they "exist" or not in a fix-sized array. a segfault
could only happen if we try to dereference a block eraser function and
jump there which we don't do here. what access(es) should segfault
exactly?

i have tried my current, reworked patch with:
"./flashrom -p dummy:bus=spi,emulate="M25P10.RES" -V -c "M25P10.RES"
-E" after deleting the block erasers for that chip i.e. .block_erasers = {};
i get the expected output of "Erase is not working on this chip.
Aborting."

-- 
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner