Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential issue(s) to consider:
New issues: - [High] The return value of `pm_runtime_get_sync()` is ignored, which can lead to hardware register accesses on an unpowered device. - [Medium] Missing `.remove` callback leaves PM runtime enabled and usage counter unbalanced on driver unbind. Pre-existing issues: - [High] Missing `phy_remove_lookup()` causes a memory leak and a dangling pointer in the global PHY lookup list. - [High] Unconditional dereference of `dev->platform_data` before validating it. -- commit e3a3844cc6f977665174375e23735f789c04a772 Author: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <[email protected]> phy: phy-mtk-dp: Allow probing with devicetree match This commit introduces a devicetree match table to decouple the DP PHY driver from the DP IP driver. It adds an OF PHY provider and MMIO regmap registration for the devicetree case, while maintaining a legacy probe path for older devicetrees without a separate PHY node. > diff --git a/drivers/phy/mediatek/phy-mtk-dp.c > b/drivers/phy/mediatek/phy-mtk-dp.c > index bf7b3a95e72d2..98e05fe05ce3b 100644 > --- a/drivers/phy/mediatek/phy-mtk-dp.c > +++ b/drivers/phy/mediatek/phy-mtk-dp.c [ ... ] > @@ -160,43 +161,92 @@ static const struct phy_ops mtk_dp_phy_dev_ops = { > .owner = THIS_MODULE, > }; > > +static int mtk_dp_phy_legacy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev, struct > mtk_dp_phy *dp_phy) > +{ > + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; > + struct phy *phy; > + > + dp_phy->regmap = *(struct regmap **)dev->platform_data; [Severity: High] This is a pre-existing issue, but does this code unconditionally dereference dev->platform_data before verifying it is not NULL? If the platform device is instantiated without platform data, would this dereference cause a kernel panic before the subsequent check for !dp_phy->regmap can execute? > + if (!dp_phy->regmap) > + return dev_err_probe(dev, -EINVAL, "No platform data > available\n"); > + > + phy = devm_phy_create(dev, NULL, &mtk_dp_phy_dev_ops); > + if (IS_ERR(phy)) > + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(phy), > + "Failed to create DP PHY\n"); > + > + phy_set_drvdata(phy, dp_phy); > + phy_create_lookup(phy, "dp", dev_name(dev)); [Severity: High] This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does this leak the lookup entry and create a dangling pointer? phy_create_lookup() dynamically allocates a phy_lookup structure and links it into the global phys list. Since there is no driver .remove callback calling phy_remove_lookup(), when the driver unbinds, the devres-managed phy is freed while still in the global list, which could cause a use-after-free when other drivers call phy_find(). > + > + return 0; > +} > + [ ... ] > static int mtk_dp_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > { [ ... ] > + provider = devm_of_phy_provider_register(dev, of_phy_simple_xlate); > + if (IS_ERR(provider)) > + return PTR_ERR(provider); > + > + pm_runtime_enable(dev); > + pm_runtime_get_sync(dev); [Severity: High] Is it safe to ignore the return value of pm_runtime_get_sync() here? If the generic power domain or clock fails to enable, pm_runtime_get_sync() will return a negative error code. Without checking this, the PHY provider is registered even if the hardware is off, which could lead to a synchronous external abort when attempting to write to the MMIO registers later. > > return 0; > } > > +static const struct of_device_id mtk_dp_phy_of_match[] = { > + { .compatible = "mediatek,mt8195-dp-phy" }, > + { /* sentinel */ } > +}; > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mtk_dp_phy_of_match); > + > static struct platform_driver mtk_dp_phy_driver = { > .probe = mtk_dp_phy_probe, > .driver = { > .name = "mediatek-dp-phy", > + .of_match_table = mtk_dp_phy_of_match, > }, > }; [Severity: Medium] Does this driver need a .remove callback to clean up the PM runtime state? Since pm_runtime_enable() and pm_runtime_get_sync() are called in probe without devm_ handlers or registered teardown actions, unbinding the driver appears to leak the usage counter and leave PM runtime permanently enabled. > module_platform_driver(mtk_dp_phy_driver); > -- Sashiko AI review ยท https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=3
