dri-devel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Haojie Li" <lihaojie@kylinos.cn>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/mediatek: Add missing IS_ERR check for ovl_adaptor platform device
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 07:07:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260819070753.5B0901F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260819065642.136222-1-lihaojie@kylinos.cn>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 5 potential issue(s) to consider:

Pre-existing issues:
- [High] The dynamically registered `ovl_adaptor` platform device is leaked on probe error paths and during device removal, causing duplicate device accumulation.
- [High] `platform_device_register_data()` is misused to create a shallow, byte-for-byte clone of a `struct device` object.
- [High] `mtk_drm_bind()` mistakenly drops the `private->mutex_node` reference on `-EPROBE_DEFER`, causing an unbalanced put and potential use-after-free.
- [High] In `mtk_drm_of_ddp_path_build_one()`, if `mtk_drm_of_get_ddp_ep_cid()` fails early, it causes a double-put of the current device node in the loop.
- [Medium] In `mtk_drm_of_ddp_path_build_one()`, if the initial call to `mtk_drm_of_get_ddp_ep_cid()` fails but sets `next`, the acquired device node reference is leaked.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH] drm/mediatek: Add missing IS_ERR check for ovl_adaptor platform device ---
commit 6317e1a251b60c3bf25295a5bff30bc7683eb97b
Author: Haojie Li <lihaojie@kylinos.cn>

drm/mediatek: Add missing IS_ERR check for ovl_adaptor platform device

This commit adds an IS_ERR() check after platform_device_register_data() in
mtk_drm_probe() to prevent a potential kernel crash due to an invalid pointer
dereference on error.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c
> index c86a3f54f35bc..667d7fdbfbac6 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/mediatek/mtk_drm_drv.c
> @@ -1112,6 +1112,10 @@ static int mtk_drm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  							    PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO,
>  							    (void *)private->mmsys_dev,
>  							    sizeof(*private->mmsys_dev));

[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but is it safe to pass
(void *)private->mmsys_dev and sizeof(*private->mmsys_dev) as the platform
data?

platform_device_register_data() kmemdups the provided memory into the new
device's platform_data. 

Copying the entire struct device object (including its kobject, mutexes,
and list heads) byte-for-byte might lead to subsystem operations running on
cloned and broken locks or kobjects when used by the OVL adaptor driver.

> +		if (IS_ERR(ovl_adaptor)) {
> +			ret = PTR_ERR(ovl_adaptor);
> +			goto err_node;
> +		}

[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but is the dynamically registered ovl_adaptor
platform device leaked on probe error paths and during device removal?

If probe fails later (for example, returning -EPROBE_DEFER) and jumps to
err_node, or when mtk_drm_remove() is called, it doesn't look like
platform_device_unregister() is ever called.

This could leave orphaned devices accumulating on the platform bus.

>  		private->ddp_comp[DDP_COMPONENT_DRM_OVL_ADAPTOR].dev = &ovl_adaptor->dev;
>  		mtk_ddp_comp_init(dev, NULL, &private->ddp_comp[DDP_COMPONENT_DRM_OVL_ADAPTOR],
>  				  DDP_COMPONENT_DRM_OVL_ADAPTOR);

[ ... ]

> static int mtk_drm_bind(struct device *dev)
> {
>       ...
>		of_node_put(private->mutex_node);
>		return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>       ...
> }

[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does mtk_drm_bind() mistakenly drop the
private->mutex_node reference on -EPROBE_DEFER?

If it drops the reference here when the disp-mutex device is delayed, and the
driver is later unbound, mtk_drm_remove() will call of_node_put() again on
the same node pointer.

Could this cause an unbalanced put and potential use-after-free?

[ ... ]

> static int mtk_drm_of_ddp_path_build_one(...)
> {
>       ...
> 	ret = mtk_drm_of_get_ddp_ep_cid(vdo, 0, cpath, &next, &temp_path[idx]);
> 	if (ret) {
> 		if (next && temp_path[idx] == DDP_COMPONENT_DRM_OVL_ADAPTOR) {
> 			...
> 		} else {
> 			if (next)
> 				dev_err(dev, "Invalid component %pOF\n", next);
> 			else
> 				dev_err(dev, "Cannot find first endpoint for path %d\n", cpath);
>
> 			return ret;
> 		}
> 	}

[Severity: Medium]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does this initial error path leak the
acquired device node reference?

If mtk_drm_of_get_ddp_ep_cid() fails but still sets next, the code logs an
error and returns ret directly.

It doesn't appear to call of_node_put(next) before returning, which would
leave the reference dangling.

[ ... ]

> 	do {
> 		prev = next;
> 		ret = mtk_drm_of_get_ddp_ep_cid(next, 1, cpath, &next, &temp_path[idx]);
> 		of_node_put(prev);
> 		if (ret) {
> 			of_node_put(next);
> 			break;
> 		}

[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but can this error path trigger a double-put of
the device node?

If mtk_drm_of_get_ddp_ep_cid() fails early (for example, returning -ENOENT)
without updating the next pointer, next will still point to prev.

The loop calls of_node_put(prev), and since ret is non-zero, it also
calls of_node_put(next). This would decrement the refcount of the same node
twice.

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260819065642.136222-1-lihaojie@kylinos.cn?part=1

  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-19  7:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-19  6:56 [PATCH] drm/mediatek: Add missing IS_ERR check for ovl_adaptor platform device Haojie Li
2026-08-19  7:07 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-25  6:23 ` CK Hu (胡俊光)
2026-08-25 10:08   ` [PATCH v2] " Haojie Li
2026-08-25 10:20     ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-26  6:50     ` CK Hu (胡俊光)

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260819070753.5B0901F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=lihaojie@kylinos.cn \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox