From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Antoni Pokusinski" <apokusinski01@gmail.com>
Cc: robh@kernel.org,
"Alexandre Belloni" <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
conor+dt@kernel.org, linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/8] rtc: abx80x: add irq to struct abx80x_priv
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 19:04:49 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260731190450.548A81F00AC4@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260731184831.44037-5-apokusinski01@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] Read-modify-write of the status register introduces a race condition that loses interrupts.
- [High] Unconditional failure in `abx80x_read_alarm` due to incorrect handling of `i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data` return value.
--
--- Patch [4]: [PATCH v3 4/8] rtc: abx80x: add irq to struct abx80x_priv ---
commit be354d8ef94de08e1314876fad55888243ca019f
Author: Antoni Pokusinski <apokusinski01@gmail.com>
rtc: abx80x: add irq to struct abx80x_priv
This adds the irq field to struct abx80x_priv so the interrupt number is not
strictly tied to the i2c_client structure. This allows it to be more easily
accessed for ABX81X SPI clocks.
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-abx80x.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-abx80x.c
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-abx80x.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-abx80x.c
> @@ -299,11 +300,12 @@ static irqreturn_t abx80x_handle_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but I noticed a potential race condition with
the status register.
In abx80x_handle_irq(), there is a read-modify-write sequence:
status = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, ABX8XX_REG_STATUS);
...
i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client, ABX8XX_REG_STATUS,
status & ~(ABX8XX_STATUS_AF | ABX8XX_STATUS_WDT));
If a hardware interrupt (such as an RTC alarm or watchdog) sets a new flag
in ABX8XX_REG_STATUS exactly between the read and write calls, wouldn't the
write operation write back a 0 for the newly set bit and inadvertently clear
it without handling it?
This same pattern appears to be present in abx80x_ioctl() as well:
tmp = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client, ABX8XX_REG_STATUS,
status);
Could this cause hardware interrupts or status flags to be silently dropped?
> static int abx80x_read_alarm(struct device *dev, struct rtc_wkalrm *t)
> {
> struct i2c_client *client = to_i2c_client(dev);
> + struct abx80x_priv *priv = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
> unsigned char buf[7];
>
> int irq_mask, err;
>
> - if (client->irq <= 0)
> + if (priv->irq <= 0)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> err = i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data(client, ABX8XX_REG_ASC,
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does this error check work
as intended?
i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data() returns the number of bytes read (which
would be 7) on success.
Looking at the code just below this in abx80x_read_alarm():
err = i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data(client, ABX8XX_REG_ASC,
sizeof(buf), buf);
if (err)
return err;
Wouldn't this evaluate to true on a successful read, causing the function
to prematurely abort and pass the byte count back as an error code?
[ ... ]
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260731184831.44037-1-apokusinski01@gmail.com?part=4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-31 19:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-31 18:48 [PATCH v3 0/8] rtc: abx80x: add support for abx81x Antoni Pokusinski
2026-07-31 18:48 ` [PATCH v3 1/8] dt-bindings: rtc: abx80x: document ABX81X RTCs Antoni Pokusinski
2026-07-31 18:57 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-31 18:48 ` [PATCH v3 2/8] rtc: abx80x: add mutex protection for register writes Antoni Pokusinski
2026-07-31 19:02 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-31 18:48 ` [PATCH v3 3/8] rtc: abx80x: properly handle shared IRQs Antoni Pokusinski
2026-07-31 19:05 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-31 18:48 ` [PATCH v3 4/8] rtc: abx80x: add irq to struct abx80x_priv Antoni Pokusinski
2026-07-31 19:04 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-31 18:48 ` [PATCH v3 5/8] rtc: abx80x: use regmap instead of I2C specific API Antoni Pokusinski
2026-07-31 19:05 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-31 18:48 ` [PATCH v3 6/8] rtc: abx80x: replace read-modify-write pattern with regmap helpers Antoni Pokusinski
2026-07-31 19:01 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-31 18:48 ` [PATCH v3 7/8] rtc: abx80x: create abx80x_i2c_probe() Antoni Pokusinski
2026-07-31 19:02 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-31 18:48 ` [PATCH v3 8/8] rtc: abx80x: add support for ABX81X Antoni Pokusinski
2026-07-31 19:05 ` 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=20260731190450.548A81F00AC4@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
--cc=apokusinski01@gmail.com \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robh@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