From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivery-date: Tue, 19 May 2026 15:16:39 +0200 Received: from metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:2:b01:1d::104]) by lore.white.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1wPKJK-001VW7-39 for lore@lore.pengutronix.de; Tue, 19 May 2026 15:16:38 +0200 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([2607:7c80:54:3::133]) by metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1wPKJK-0003xT-9Y for lore@pengutronix.de; Tue, 19 May 2026 15:16:38 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=kRsYDnxVDfWsRHCk2Y/MwTw6n2UC+NjfP4Jz5C7RPjE=; b=a5CvsjqvbA9fjVzd7rcL+6hfcQ wEUbkpTD5BQq5Xg2rW3RfqcjMKyRtRcK7OOt6lPeWMwQ26Vsysf2hUlWEQBcAJFkwkOeg/XOenn+F Y86WFOAfgVTonhRWrA3+sMYMQ0PlTMWyJp2o/S3P71dUQ1PeTwXfmiqeCSvyH2wG8i1H234MqKiJ0 njVhhjQiM3rtoc13GNH3B34SKbIVHUkkpwUz9IGWqgXt+bTeOcKIlKjEnDM9GaQ3S7wBP8amN+GnO Dzr+WgIZQDdn+Rj1PaIZiJfuEeaPZXOC9vJsK7/Pjx85hXnL+f2HXCvXk8GvylaWgmX8yu9d0Nx/v 7KN/TQ8Q==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wPKJ3-00000001blb-3d7j; Tue, 19 May 2026 13:16:21 +0000 Received: from metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:2:b01:1d::104]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wPKJ0-00000001bkU-3Mab for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 19 May 2026 13:16:20 +0000 Received: from ptz.office.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:0:900:1d::77] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1wPKIz-0003uF-5q; Tue, 19 May 2026 15:16:17 +0200 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 May 2026 15:16:17 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Sascha Hauer Cc: Barebox List References: From: Ahmad Fatoum Content-Language: en-US, de-DE, de-BE In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.9.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20260519_061618_847199_362BE9CF X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 22.38 ) X-BeenThere: barebox@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "barebox" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2607:7c80:54:3::133 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: barebox-bounces+lore=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fs: ubifs: zero initialize allocated inode X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 08 May 2019 21:11:16 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de) Hi, On 5/19/26 3:14 PM, Sascha Hauer wrote: > On 2026-05-19 15:03, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 5/19/26 2:44 PM, Sascha Hauer wrote: >>> UBIFS uses kmem_cache_alloc() to allocate an ubifs_inode. The memory >>> returned from kmem_cache_alloc() is not zeroed. ubifs_alloc_inode() >>> zeroes all fields in the ubifs_inode except the embedded struct inode. >>> In Linux this is done in the kmem_cache constructor function which calls >>> inode_init_once(). In barebox we have the constructor function as well, >>> but we don't have an equivalent of inode_init_once(), so the constructor >>> is empty. zero the inode in the constructor instead so that barebox >>> gets a zeroed inode. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer >>> --- >>> fs/ubifs/super.c | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/fs/ubifs/super.c b/fs/ubifs/super.c >>> index 45037b42ea..4022270d4c 100644 >>> --- a/fs/ubifs/super.c >>> +++ b/fs/ubifs/super.c >>> @@ -1128,6 +1128,7 @@ static void kill_ubifs_super(struct super_block *s) >>> */ >>> static void inode_slab_ctor(void *obj) >>> { >>> + memset(obj, 0, sizeof(struct inode)); >> >> This works because inode is the first member of struct ubifs_inode, but >> I would prefer to avoid depending on that as it might change with a >> future update. >> >> Can't we just zero all of struct ubifs_inode here to be on the safe side? > > That was my first approach as well, but I was afraid this could be lost > on an UBIFS update. > > I could treat obj as a struct ubifs_inode and zero the inode member > instead. Yes, that would work too. > > That would have prevented the bug I introduced with the JFFS2 patch as > well. > > Sascha > > -- > Pengutronix e.K. | | > Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | > 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | > Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | > -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |