From: Bough Chen <haibo.chen@oss.nxp.com>
To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev
Cc: Ciprian Costea <ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com>,
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Frank.Li@kernel.org,
imx@lists.linux.dev, linux-can@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org,
conor+dt@kernel.org, Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>,
Vincent Mailhol <mailhol@kernel.org>,
Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/6] can: flexcan: use dedicated IRQ handlers for multi-IRQ platforms
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 16:32:41 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260824083241.4spcdohbsot6x4wc@shlinux89> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260713090746.D2B4B1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org>
On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 09:07:46AM +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:
>
> New issues:
> - [High] Splitting the IRQ handler breaks the FLEXCAN_QUIRK_BROKEN_PERR_STATE workaround on multi-IRQ platforms.
>
> Pre-existing issues:
> - [Critical] Concurrent lockless modifications of `skb_irq_queue` by multiple IRQ handlers causes list corruption.
> - [High] Incomplete fix for duplicate frame processing on platforms with secondary mailbox IRQs.
> --
>
> --- Patch [1]: [PATCH v6 1/6] can: flexcan: use dedicated IRQ handlers for multi-IRQ platforms ---
> commit b6f6f5d373c333a28a06c2ed84ea386f9dc5b122
> Author: Ciprian Marian Costea <ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com>
>
> can: flexcan: use dedicated IRQ handlers for multi-IRQ platforms
>
> On platforms with multiple IRQ lines (S32G2, MCF5441X), all lines are
> registered to the same flexcan_irq() handler. Since these are distinct IRQ
> numbers, they can be dispatched concurrently on different CPUs. Both
> instances then read the same iflag and ESR registers unconditionally,
> leading to duplicate frame processing.
>
> Fix this by splitting the monolithic handler into focused parts:
> - flexcan_do_mb(): processes mailbox events
> - flexcan_do_state(): processes device state change events
> - flexcan_do_berr(): processes bus error events
>
> Introduce dedicated IRQ handlers for multi-IRQ platforms:
> - flexcan_irq_mb(): mailbox-only, used for mb-0, mb-1 IRQ lines
> - flexcan_irq_boff(): state-change-only, used for boff/state IRQ line
> - flexcan_irq_berr(): bus-error-only, used for berr IRQ line
>
> The combined flexcan_irq() handler is preserved for single-IRQ
> platforms with no functional change.
>
> Fixes: d9cead75b1c6 ("can: flexcan: add mcf5441x support")
> Signed-off-by: Ciprian Marian Costea <ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com>
> Reviewed-by: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol@kernel.org>
> Reviewed-and-tested-by: Haibo Chen <haibo.chen@nxp.com>
> Tested-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <eballetb@redhat.com>
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/can/flexcan/flexcan-core.c b/drivers/net/can/flexcan/flexcan-core.c
> > index f5d22c61503fa..f73ff442d5304 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/can/flexcan/flexcan-core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/can/flexcan/flexcan-core.c
> > @@ -1188,6 +1218,65 @@ static irqreturn_t flexcan_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > + return handled;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/* Combined IRQ handler for single-IRQ platforms */
> > +static irqreturn_t flexcan_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
> > +{
> > + struct net_device *dev = dev_id;
> > + struct flexcan_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> > + irqreturn_t handled;
> > +
> > + handled = flexcan_do_mb(dev);
> > + handled |= flexcan_do_state(dev);
> > + handled |= flexcan_do_berr(dev);
> > +
> > + if (handled)
> > + can_rx_offload_irq_finish(&priv->offload);
> > +
> > + return handled;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/* Mailbox IRQ handler for multi-IRQ platforms */
> > +static irqreturn_t flexcan_irq_mb(int irq, void *dev_id)
> > +{
> > + struct net_device *dev = dev_id;
> > + struct flexcan_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> > + irqreturn_t handled;
> > +
> > + handled = flexcan_do_mb(dev);
>
> [Severity: High]
> Does isolating mailbox handling into flexcan_irq_mb() break the
> FLEXCAN_QUIRK_BROKEN_PERR_STATE workaround?
>
> On multi-IRQ platforms with this quirk (such as MCF5441X and S32G2), the
> hardware fails to trigger a state change interrupt, meaning flexcan_irq_boff()
> won't fire. The baseline driver worked around this by polling the state via
> flexcan_do_state() during every mailbox interrupt in the monolithic handler.
>
> Since flexcan_irq_mb() completely bypasses flexcan_do_state(), could this cause
> the driver to silently miss CAN error state transitions (e.g., Error Passive)
> when the error rate increases?
AI is correct, need to fix this in next version.
>
> > +
> > + if (handled)
> > + can_rx_offload_irq_finish(&priv->offload);
> > +
> > + return handled;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/* Bus error IRQ handler for multi-IRQ platforms */
> > +static irqreturn_t flexcan_irq_berr(int irq, void *dev_id)
> > +{
> > + struct net_device *dev = dev_id;
> > + struct flexcan_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> > + irqreturn_t handled;
> > +
> > + handled = flexcan_do_berr(dev);
>
> [Severity: Critical]
> This is a pre-existing issue, but does having dedicated IRQ handlers
> running concurrently on different CPUs cause a race condition in the rx offload
> framework?
>
> If flexcan_irq_mb() and flexcan_irq_berr() fire simultaneously, both will
> eventually call into the CAN rx offload framework (e.g., via
> can_rx_offload_queue_timestamp()):
>
> drivers/net/can/dev/rx-offload.c:can_rx_offload_queue_timestamp() {
> ...
> __skb_queue_add_sort(&offload->skb_irq_queue, skb,
> can_rx_offload_compare);
> ...
> }
>
> Since __skb_queue_add_sort() locklessly modifies skb_irq_queue, could
> concurrent execution of these handlers corrupt the sk_buff linked lists?
Yes, should be handled in another patch.
>
> > +
> > + if (handled)
> > + can_rx_offload_irq_finish(&priv->offload);
> > +
> > + return handled;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/* Device state change IRQ handler for multi-IRQ platforms */
> > +static irqreturn_t flexcan_irq_boff(int irq, void *dev_id)
> > +{
>
> [ ... ]
>
> > @@ -1761,25 +1850,30 @@ static int flexcan_open(struct net_device *dev)
> >
> > can_rx_offload_enable(&priv->offload);
> >
> > - err = request_irq(dev->irq, flexcan_irq, IRQF_SHARED, dev->name, dev);
> > + if (priv->devtype_data.quirks & FLEXCAN_QUIRK_NR_IRQ_3)
> > + err = request_irq(dev->irq, flexcan_irq_mb,
> > + IRQF_SHARED, dev->name, dev);
> > + else
> > + err = request_irq(dev->irq, flexcan_irq,
> > + IRQF_SHARED, dev->name, dev);
>
> [ ... ]
>
> > if (priv->devtype_data.quirks & FLEXCAN_QUIRK_SECONDARY_MB_IRQ) {
> > err = request_irq(priv->irq_secondary_mb,
> > - flexcan_irq, IRQF_SHARED, dev->name, dev);
> > + flexcan_irq_mb, IRQF_SHARED, dev->name, dev);
>
> [Severity: High]
> This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does registering the same
> flexcan_irq_mb() handler for both primary and secondary MB IRQ lines leave the
> duplicate frame processing bug unfixed on platforms with secondary mailboxes?
>
> If both IRQ lines fire concurrently on S32G2, flexcan_irq_mb() is dispatched to
> both CPUs. Since flexcan_do_mb() doesn't check which IRQ line triggered it,
> won't both CPUs unconditionally process all mailboxes, resulting in every
> frame being processed twice?
I think this is fixed by PATCH3.
Regards
Haibo Chen
>
> > if (err)
> > goto out_free_irq_err;
> > }
>
> --
> Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260713085306.2643794-1-ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-24 8:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-13 8:53 [PATCH v6 0/6] can: flexcan: Add NXP S32N79 SoC support Ciprian Costea
2026-07-13 8:53 ` [PATCH v6 1/6] can: flexcan: use dedicated IRQ handlers for multi-IRQ platforms Ciprian Costea
2026-07-13 9:07 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-24 8:32 ` Bough Chen [this message]
2026-07-13 8:53 ` [PATCH v6 2/6] can: flexcan: disable all IRQ lines in flexcan_chip_interrupts_enable() Ciprian Costea
2026-07-13 9:07 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-24 8:57 ` Bough Chen
2026-07-13 8:53 ` [PATCH v6 3/6] can: flexcan: split rx/tx masks per mailbox IRQ line Ciprian Costea
2026-07-13 9:08 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-24 10:12 ` Bough Chen
2026-08-24 10:16 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2026-07-13 8:53 ` [PATCH v6 4/6] dt-bindings: can: fsl,flexcan: add NXP S32N79 SoC support Ciprian Costea
2026-07-13 9:18 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-24 10:15 ` Bough Chen
2026-07-13 8:53 ` [PATCH v6 5/6] can: flexcan: add FLEXCAN_QUIRK_IRQ_BERR quirk Ciprian Costea
2026-07-13 9:19 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-24 10:19 ` Bough Chen
2026-07-13 8:53 ` [PATCH v6 6/6] can: flexcan: add NXP S32N79 SoC support Ciprian Costea
2026-07-29 11:21 ` [PATCH v6 0/6] can: flexcan: Add " Ciprian Marian Costea
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=20260824083241.4spcdohbsot6x4wc@shlinux89 \
--to=haibo.chen@oss.nxp.com \
--cc=Frank.Li@kernel.org \
--cc=ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=imx@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mailhol@kernel.org \
--cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
--cc=o.rempel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=socketcan@hartkopp.net \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).