From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Jacopo Mondi" <jacopo.mondi@ideasonboard.com>
Cc: media-ci@linuxtv.org, robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] media: i2c: mira016: Add driver for Mira016
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2026 11:06:10 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260930110610.C10771F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260930-mira016-v5-2-499a34ab8204@ideasonboard.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 6 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] pm: usage counter underflow due to incorrect pm_runtime_get_if_in_use check
- [High] media: use-after-free in mira016_remove via early control handler free
- [High] media: I2C register corruption due to overlapping 32-bit writes
- [Medium] build: missing select V4L2_FWNODE causes unmet dependencies
- [Medium] media: integer precision loss in mira016_calc_prate
- [Medium] media: I2C read errors swallowed during PLL lock polling
--
commit 3aea445f536c7012ef543a433b00f827003a9007
Author: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo.mondi@ideasonboard.com>
media: i2c: mira016: Add driver for Mira016
Add driver for the ams OSRAM Mira016 sensor.
> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig b/drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig
> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/Kconfig
> @@ -321,6 +321,18 @@ config VIDEO_IMX678
> To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the
> module will be called imx678.
>
> +config VIDEO_MIRA016
> + tristate "ams OSRAM MIRA016 sensor support"
> + depends on I2C && VIDEO_DEV
> + depends on GPIOLIB
> + select V4L2_CCI_I2C
[Severity: Medium]
Could this lead to kernel build failures due to unresolved symbols?
The driver uses APIs like v4l2_fwnode_endpoint_alloc_parse() in
mira016_parse_endpoint() which depend on the v4l2-fwnode module. Because
V4L2_FWNODE is not selected here, linking may fail when this module is not
enabled by other configs.
> + help
> + This is a Video4Linux2 sensor driver for the ams OSRAM
> + MIRA016 camera.
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/mira016.c b/drivers/media/i2c/mira016.c
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/mira016.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,2309 @@
[ ... ]
> +#define MIRA016_EXP_TIME_L_REG CCI_REG32(0x000e)
> +#define MIRA016_EXP_TIME_S_REG CCI_REG32(0x0012)
> +#define MIRA016_NUM_FRAMES_REG CCI_REG32(0x0007)
> +#define MIRA016_TARGET_FRAME_TIME_REG CCI_REG32(0x0008)
[Severity: High]
Does this sequence cause hardware register corruption?
MIRA016_NUM_FRAMES_REG (0x0007) and MIRA016_TARGET_FRAME_TIME_REG (0x0008)
are defined as 32-bit (CCI_REG32) and are written sequentially in
mira016_write_frame_duration_reg().
Because the addresses only have an offset of 1 between them, the first
write spans 0x0007-0x000a, and the second spans 0x0008-0x000b. This will
overwrite the first value and adjacent registers like CMD_REQ_1_REG.
> +
> +#define MIRA016_TIME_UNIT_REG CCI_REG16(0x0012)
> +#define MIRA016_GLOB_TIME_REG CCI_REG16(0x015a)
[ ... ]
> +static inline u32 mira016_calc_prate(struct mira016 *mira016, u32 h_tot)
> +{
> + /*
> + * Pixel rate is calculate as the row duration divided by the total line
> + * length.
> + *
> + * pixel time (psec) = t_row(psec) / h_tot
> + * pixel rate (mbps) = 10^12 / pixel_time
> + * = 10^12 * h_tot / t_row
> + * = h_tot * 10^6 / t_row * 10^6 to avoid overflows
> + */
> + u32 trow_psec = mira016_trow_psec(mira016);
> +
> + return h_tot * HZ_PER_MHZ / trow_psec * HZ_PER_MHZ;
[Severity: Medium]
Will this evaluation lose significant precision?
The expression h_tot * HZ_PER_MHZ / trow_psec * HZ_PER_MHZ is evaluated
left-to-right. The integer division (h_tot * HZ_PER_MHZ) / trow_psec drops
all fractional sub-MHz precision before the final multiplication.
This can cause the pixel rate reported to userspace to be severely truncated
to 1 MHz boundaries, leading to framing inaccuracies.
> +}
[ ... ]
> +static int mira016_configure_timings(struct mira016 *mira016)
> +{
> + int ret = 0;
> + u64 val;
> +
> + /* Configure the PLL clock tree. */
> +
> + cci_write(mira016->regmap, MIRA016_BANK_SEL_REG, 0, &ret);
> +
> + cci_write(mira016->regmap, MIRA016_PLL_DIV_N_REG, mira016->pll.n, &ret);
> + cci_write(mira016->regmap, MIRA016_PLL_DIV_M_REG, mira016->pll.m, &ret);
[ ... ]
> + cci_write(mira016->regmap, MIRA016_PLL_PD_REG, 0, &ret);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = read_poll_timeout(cci_read, ret,
> + (ret < 0 || (val & MIRA016_PLL_LOCKED)),
> + 500, 10000, false, mira016->regmap,
> + MIRA016_PLL_LOCK_REG, &val, NULL);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
[Severity: Medium]
Are we masking I2C read errors during PLL lock polling?
The read_poll_timeout macro evaluates its break condition (ret < 0 || ...).
If cci_read() fails, ret is negative, the condition evaluates to true, and
the macro exits returning 0. This return value overwrites ret = 0, masking
the I2C failure and potentially proceeding with uninitialized PLLs.
> +
> + /* Configure the sensor timings. */
[ ... ]
> +static int mira016_set_ctrl(struct v4l2_ctrl *ctrl)
> +{
> + struct mira016 *mira016 =
> + container_of(ctrl->handler, struct mira016, ctrl_handler);
> + struct i2c_client *client = v4l2_get_subdevdata(&mira016->sd);
> + struct v4l2_subdev_state *state;
> + struct v4l2_rect *crop;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + state = v4l2_subdev_get_locked_active_state(&mira016->sd);
> + crop = v4l2_subdev_state_get_crop(state, 0);
[ ... ]
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + if (!pm_runtime_get_if_in_use(&client->dev))
> + return 0;
[Severity: High]
Could this result in a usage counter underflow and hardware access while
powered off?
When Runtime PM is disabled or not fully active, pm_runtime_get_if_in_use()
returns a negative error code like -EINVAL. The strict negation !(-EINVAL)
evaluates to false, bypassing the abort condition.
This allows the function to proceed with unpowered hardware access and
eventually call pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(), which underflows the usage
counter.
> +
> + switch (ctrl->id) {
> + case V4L2_CID_EXPOSURE:
[ ... ]
> +static void mira016_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
> +{
> + struct v4l2_subdev *sd = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
> + struct mira016 *mira016 = to_mira016(sd);
> +
> + v4l2_ctrl_handler_free(mira016->sd.ctrl_handler);
> +
> + v4l2_async_unregister_subdev(sd);
[Severity: High]
Could this early free result in a use-after-free vulnerability?
In this teardown path, v4l2_ctrl_handler_free() is called before
v4l2_async_unregister_subdev(). The subdevice remains active and accessible
to userspace and the media core while its control handler is destroyed.
A concurrent userspace ioctl (like VIDIOC_S_CTRL) can access the freed
control handler, potentially leading to kernel memory corruption.
> + v4l2_subdev_cleanup(&mira016->sd);
> + media_entity_cleanup(&sd->entity);
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260930-mira016-v5-0-499a34ab8204@ideasonboard.com?part=2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-30 11:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-30 10:51 [PATCH v5 0/2] media: i2c: Add driver for Mira016 Jacopo Mondi
2026-09-30 10:51 ` [PATCH v5 1/2] dt-bindings: media: i2c: Add Mira016 image sensor Jacopo Mondi
2026-09-30 10:51 ` [PATCH v5 2/2] media: i2c: mira016: Add driver for Mira016 Jacopo Mondi
2026-09-30 11:06 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-09-30 13:47 ` Tarang Raval
2026-09-30 16:34 ` Jacopo Mondi
2026-10-01 6:51 ` Sakari Ailus
2026-10-01 6:46 ` Sakari Ailus
2026-10-01 7:19 ` Jacopo Mondi
2026-10-01 7:52 ` Sakari Ailus
2026-10-01 10:07 ` Jacopo Mondi
2026-10-01 10:58 ` Sakari Ailus
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=20260930110610.C10771F000FF@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jacopo.mondi@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=media-ci@linuxtv.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