[ 070/108] UBI: fix eraseblock picking criteria
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: 2012-03-30 22:46:33
Also in:
lkml
3.0-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@linux.intel.com> commit 7eb3aa65853e1b223bfc786b023b702018cb76c0 upstream. The 'find_wl_entry()' function expects the maximum difference as the second argument, not the maximum absolute value. So the "unknown" eraseblock picking was incorrect, as Shmulik Ladkani spotted. This patch fixes the issue. Reported-by: Shmulik Ladkani <redacted> Signed-off-by: Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Shmulik Ladkani <redacted> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> --- drivers/mtd/ubi/wl.c | 10 ++++------ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
--- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/wl.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/wl.c@@ -386,7 +386,7 @@ static struct ubi_wl_entry *find_wl_entr */ int ubi_wl_get_peb(struct ubi_device *ubi, int dtype) { - int err, medium_ec; + int err; struct ubi_wl_entry *e, *first, *last; ubi_assert(dtype == UBI_LONGTERM || dtype == UBI_SHORTTERM ||
@@ -424,7 +424,7 @@ retry: * For unknown data we pick a physical eraseblock with medium * erase counter. But we by no means can pick a physical * eraseblock with erase counter greater or equivalent than the - * lowest erase counter plus %WL_FREE_MAX_DIFF. + * lowest erase counter plus %WL_FREE_MAX_DIFF/2. */ first = rb_entry(rb_first(&ubi->free), struct ubi_wl_entry, u.rb);
@@ -433,10 +433,8 @@ retry: if (last->ec - first->ec < WL_FREE_MAX_DIFF) e = rb_entry(ubi->free.rb_node, struct ubi_wl_entry, u.rb); - else { - medium_ec = (first->ec + WL_FREE_MAX_DIFF)/2; - e = find_wl_entry(&ubi->free, medium_ec); - } + else + e = find_wl_entry(&ubi->free, WL_FREE_MAX_DIFF/2); break; case UBI_SHORTTERM: /*