From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Herve Codina" <herve.codina@bootlin.com>
Cc: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 7/9] PCI: of: Clear fwnode->dev during root bridge node removal
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2026 10:34:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260708103435.2E2421F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260708100302.517792-8-herve.codina@bootlin.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] Missing fw_devlink cleanup in the error path of of_pci_make_host_bridge_node(), leaving a dangling fwnode->dev pointer.
- [High] Kernel panic on removal of overlay-provided PCI host bridge nodes due to unsafe changeset revert.
--
--- Patch [7]: [PATCH v9 7/9] PCI: of: Clear fwnode->dev during root bridge node removal ---
commit 9e6873c21d6442ce4222fe6e9ac417348c8b3fbd
Author: Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com>
PCI: of: Clear fwnode->dev during root bridge node removal
This commit clears fwnode->dev during of_pci_remove_host_bridge_node() to
prevent a dangling pointer. It ensures fw_devlink_set_device() is called
with a NULL device before the fwnode is cleared.
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/of.c b/drivers/pci/of.c
> index ee9eb384b377a..8dd558a490bbd 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/of.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/of.c
> @@ -743,6 +743,7 @@ void of_pci_remove_host_bridge_node(struct pci_host_bridge *bridge)
> if (!np || !of_node_check_flag(np, OF_DYNAMIC))
> return;
>
> + fw_devlink_set_device(&np->fwnode, NULL);
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does of_pci_make_host_bridge_node()
also need to clear the fwnode->dev pointer on its error path?
If device_add_of_node() fails in of_pci_make_host_bridge_node(), it jumps
to the error paths but leaves np->fwnode.dev pointing to the bridge device:
drivers/pci/of.c:of_pci_make_host_bridge_node() {
...
fw_devlink_set_device(&np->fwnode, &bridge->dev);
...
/* Add the of_node to host bridge and the root bus */
ret = device_add_of_node(&bridge->dev, np);
if (ret)
goto out_revert_cset;
ret = device_add_of_node(&bridge->bus->dev, np);
if (ret)
goto out_remove_bridge_dev_of_node;
...
out_remove_bridge_dev_of_node:
device_remove_of_node(&bridge->dev);
out_revert_cset:
np->data = NULL;
of_changeset_revert(cset);
out_free_node:
of_node_put(np);
...
}
If a concurrent thread acquired a reference to np, could the node outlive
the error path and result in a use-after-free where fwnode->dev points to
freed memory?
> device_remove_of_node(&bridge->bus->dev);
> device_remove_of_node(&bridge->dev);
> of_changeset_revert(np->data);
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does calling
of_changeset_revert(np->data) unconditionally cause a crash when removing
an overlay-provided PCI host bridge node?
When an overlay provides the device tree node for a PCI host bridge, the
node inherently has the OF_DYNAMIC flag set. If the bridge is removed,
of_pci_remove_host_bridge_node() assumes the node was created by
of_pci_make_host_bridge_node() and executes of_changeset_revert(np->data).
Since np->data is NULL for standard overlay nodes, does this result in a
NULL pointer dereference in __of_changeset_revert_entries() when it tries
to evaluate &ocs->entries?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260708100302.517792-1-herve.codina@bootlin.com?part=7
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-08 10:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-08 10:02 [PATCH v9 0/9] lan966x pci device: Add support for SFPs, PCI part Herve Codina
2026-07-08 10:02 ` [PATCH v9 1/9] driver core: fw_devlink: Introduce fw_devlink_set_device() Herve Codina
2026-07-08 10:08 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-08 10:02 ` [PATCH v9 2/9] drivers: core: Use fw_devlink_set_device() Herve Codina
2026-07-08 10:12 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-08 10:02 ` [PATCH v9 3/9] pinctrl: cs42l43: " Herve Codina
2026-07-08 10:20 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-08 10:02 ` [PATCH v9 4/9] cxl/test: Use device_set_node() Herve Codina
2026-07-08 10:15 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-08 10:02 ` [PATCH v9 5/9] cxl/test: Use fw_devlink_set_device() Herve Codina
2026-07-08 10:16 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-08 10:02 ` [PATCH v9 6/9] PCI: of: " Herve Codina
2026-07-08 10:29 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-08 10:02 ` [PATCH v9 7/9] PCI: of: Clear fwnode->dev during root bridge node removal Herve Codina
2026-07-08 10:34 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-08 10:02 ` [PATCH v9 8/9] PCI: of: Set fwnode device of newly created PCI device nodes Herve Codina
2026-07-08 10:43 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-08 10:02 ` [PATCH v9 9/9] PCI: of: Remove fwnode_dev_initialized() call for a PCI root bridge node Herve Codina
2026-07-08 10:48 ` sashiko-bot
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=20260708103435.2E2421F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=herve.codina@bootlin.com \
--cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--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