On Tue, Mar 03, 2026 at 01:38:03PM +0000, Daniel Golle wrote: > On Tue, Mar 03, 2026 at 02:29:08PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote: > > When dev_get_priv errors out, the ubifs is not unbounted (if used) > > I don't understand why or where UBIFS is being used here. > Did you mean to say "UBI is not attached"? > UBI != UBIFS. >
Function that is not called is umount_ubifs. That calls cmd_ubifs_umount. unbounted is a typo for unmounted. Probably the confusion is present already in the FS loader driver where ubi needed to be used instead of ubifs? There are mount_ubifs and umount_ubifs but they should have been mount_ubi and umount_ubi ? But then they use ubifs cmd OPs. I'm a bit confused here. > > > > Correctly handle this handle condition and while at it also return -EINVAL > > instead of -ENOMEM as a better error since no memory is allocated but is > > actually an invalid scenario for fw_get_filesystem_firmware(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/misc/fs_loader.c | 6 ++++-- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/misc/fs_loader.c b/drivers/misc/fs_loader.c > > index 2928cf75f89e..7e432a7ebd62 100644 > > --- a/drivers/misc/fs_loader.c > > +++ b/drivers/misc/fs_loader.c > > @@ -178,8 +178,10 @@ static int fw_get_filesystem_firmware(struct udevice > > *dev) > > > > struct firmware *firmwarep = dev_get_priv(dev); > > > > - if (!firmwarep) > > - return -ENOMEM; > > + if (!firmwarep) { > > + ret = -EINVAL; > > + goto out; > > + } > > > > ret = fs_read(firmwarep->name, (ulong)map_to_sysmem(firmwarep->data), > > firmwarep->offset, firmwarep->size, &actread); > > -- > > 2.51.0 > > -- Ansuel
