From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@kernel.org>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, krzk+dt@kernel.org, robh@kernel.org,
conor+dt@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] [v5 net-next] p54spi: convert to devicetree
Date: Fri, 08 May 2026 21:32:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260508213256.45BE6C2BCB0@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260507212451.3333185-3-arnd@kernel.org>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] The `p54spi_spi_read` function performs an SPI transfer using a stack-allocated buffer, which violates DMA mapping rules.
- [High] Missing validation for `spi->irq` before calling `request_irq()`.
--
commit fa2ad50656ff32f99005056eb774d07bdf3f221c
Author: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
p54spi: convert to devicetree
This commit converts the Prism54 SPI driver from using hardcoded GPIO
module parameters to using the GPIO descriptor interface and device tree
probing.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/p54spi.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/p54spi.c
> index 9d66dcae54e02..d18be25450285 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/p54spi.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intersil/p54/p54spi.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -30,19 +31,6 @@
> MODULE_FIRMWARE("3826.arm");
> MODULE_FIRMWARE("3826.eeprom");
>
> -/* gpios should be handled in board files and provided via platform data,
> - * but because it's currently impossible for p54spi to have a header file
> - * in include/linux, let's use module parameters for now
> - */
> -
> -static int p54spi_gpio_power = 97;
> -module_param(p54spi_gpio_power, int, 0444);
> -MODULE_PARM_DESC(p54spi_gpio_power, "gpio number for power line");
> -
> -static int p54spi_gpio_irq = 87;
> -module_param(p54spi_gpio_irq, int, 0444);
> -MODULE_PARM_DESC(p54spi_gpio_irq, "gpio number for irq line");
> -
> static void p54spi_spi_read(struct p54s_priv *priv, u8 address,
> void *buf, size_t len)
> {
This problem wasn't introduced by this patch, but I noticed a pre-existing
issue in the context here. Does the p54spi_spi_read() function perform an SPI
transfer using a stack-allocated buffer?
Looking at p54spi_spi_read(), the addr variable is allocated on the stack and
passed as a transfer buffer to spi_sync(). The SPI framework maps transfer
buffers for DMA. Passing a stack-allocated buffer is illegal, particularly with
CONFIG_VMAP_STACK enabled, because stack memory resides in vmalloc space and
cannot be safely DMA-mapped.
Could this cause memory corruption or a kernel panic during the transfer?
[ ... ]
> @@ -608,31 +596,20 @@ static int p54spi_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> goto err_free;
> }
>
> - ret = gpio_request(p54spi_gpio_power, "p54spi power");
> - if (ret < 0) {
> - dev_err(&priv->spi->dev, "power GPIO request failed: %d", ret);
> + priv->gpio_powerdown = gpiod_get_optional(&spi->dev, "powerdown", GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);
> + if (IS_ERR(priv->gpio_powerdown)) {
> + ret = dev_err_probe(&priv->spi->dev, PTR_ERR(priv->gpio_powerdown),
> + "powerdown GPIO request failed\n");
> goto err_free;
> }
>
> - ret = gpio_request(p54spi_gpio_irq, "p54spi irq");
> - if (ret < 0) {
> - dev_err(&priv->spi->dev, "irq GPIO request failed: %d", ret);
> - goto err_free_gpio_power;
> - }
> -
> - gpio_direction_output(p54spi_gpio_power, 0);
> - gpio_direction_input(p54spi_gpio_irq);
> -
> - ret = request_irq(gpio_to_irq(p54spi_gpio_irq),
> - p54spi_interrupt, IRQF_NO_AUTOEN, "p54spi",
> - priv->spi);
> + ret = request_irq(spi->irq, p54spi_interrupt, IRQF_NO_AUTOEN, "p54spi", priv->spi);
Is there missing validation for spi->irq before calling request_irq()?
If the device tree node lacks an interrupts property, the SPI core may set
spi->irq to 0 or a negative error code.
Passing this directly to request_irq() without validation can successfully
hijack a core system interrupt like the system timer on some architectures,
leading to system instability or deadlocks.
Should there be a check like if (spi->irq <= 0) to fail the probe gracefully?
> if (ret < 0) {
> dev_err(&priv->spi->dev, "request_irq() failed");
> - goto err_free_gpio_irq;
> + goto err_free_gpio_power;
> }
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260507212451.3333185-1-arnd@kernel.org?part=2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-08 21:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-07 21:24 [PATCH 0/3] [v5 net-next] wireless: p54 devicetree conversion Arnd Bergmann
2026-05-07 21:24 ` [PATCH 1/3] [v5 net-next] dt-bindings: net: add st,stlc4560/p54spi binding Arnd Bergmann
2026-05-08 15:05 ` Conor Dooley
2026-05-08 21:32 ` sashiko-bot
2026-05-09 15:56 ` Conor Dooley
2026-05-09 16:31 ` Roman Gushchin
2026-05-09 18:08 ` Conor Dooley
2026-05-07 21:24 ` [PATCH 2/3] [v5 net-next] p54spi: convert to devicetree Arnd Bergmann
2026-05-08 21:32 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-05-09 17:08 ` Arnd Bergmann
2026-05-07 21:24 ` [PATCH 3/3] [v5 omap] ARM: dts: omap2: add stlc4560 spi-wireless node Arnd Bergmann
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=20260508213256.45BE6C2BCB0@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=arnd@kernel.org \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko@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