Devicetree
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Amirreza Zarrabi" <amirreza.zarrabi@oss.qualcomm.com>
Cc: conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 03/10] firmware: add RPMI TEE bus support
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2026 03:38:06 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-163566@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261007-riscv-rpmi-tee-abi-v2-3-45939a13d223@oss.qualcomm.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] firmware: rpmi_tee_device_register() stub returns NULL breaking IS_ERR() expectations
- [Medium] firmware: rpmi_tee: missing modpost support breaks module auto-loading
- [Medium] firmware: rpmi_tee: UAF on module unload via device release callback
- [Low] sysfs: modalias_show() output lacks a trailing newline
--

commit 8388a45d46f5e78edd5f56a8926f96afd8a74a91
Author: Amirreza Zarrabi <amirreza.zarrabi@oss.qualcomm.com>

firmware: add RPMI TEE bus support

RPMI TEE endpoints can provide multiple services identified by UUID.
This patch adds a service bus to allow consumer drivers to bind to these
services, exposing endpoint IDs, UUIDs, and modaliases via sysfs.

> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/riscv_rpmi_tee/bus.c b/drivers/firmware/riscv_rpmi_tee/bus.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..1393adda0d3a7
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/riscv_rpmi_tee/bus.c
[ ... ]
> +#define RPMI_TEE_UEVENT_MODALIAS_FMT	"rpmi_tee:%pUb"
[ ... ]
> +static ssize_t modalias_show(struct device *dev,
> +				struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf)
> +{
> +	struct rpmi_tee_device *rdev = to_rpmi_tee_dev(dev);
> +
> +	return sysfs_emit(buf, RPMI_TEE_UEVENT_MODALIAS_FMT, &rdev->uuid);
> +}

[Severity: Low]
Does this sysfs output need a trailing newline? RPMI_TEE_UEVENT_MODALIAS_FMT
is defined without a newline (which is correct for add_uevent_var()), but
reusing it here with sysfs_emit() will result in an output string that doesn't
have one. Should a newline be appended for the sysfs interface?

[ ... ]
> +static void rpmi_tee_device_release(struct device *dev)
> +{
> +	struct rpmi_tee_device *rdev = to_rpmi_tee_dev(dev);
> +
> +	ida_free(&rpmi_tee_bus_id, rdev->id);
> +	kfree(rdev);
> +}
[ ... ]
> +struct rpmi_tee_device *
> +rpmi_tee_device_register(const uuid_t *uuid, u32 endpoint_id,
> +			 const struct rpmi_tee_ops *ops, struct device *parent)
> +{
[ ... ]
> +	rdev->dev.parent = parent;
> +	rdev->dev.bus = &rpmi_tee_bus_type;
> +	rdev->dev.release = rpmi_tee_device_release;

[Severity: Medium]
Could this lead to a use-after-free on module unload? If userspace holds a
sysfs attribute open for an rpmi_tee device, the device kobject's refcount
remains non-zero.

If the module is unloaded during this time, the release function and the
global rpmi_tee_bus_id IDA are unmapped.

When the sysfs file is eventually closed and the final kobject refcount is
dropped, could the kernel jump to the unmapped rpmi_tee_device_release()
and access freed IDA memory?

> diff --git a/include/linux/rpmi_tee.h b/include/linux/rpmi_tee.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..c499f0427833e
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/linux/rpmi_tee.h
[ ... ]
> +struct rpmi_tee_device_id {
> +	uuid_t uuid;
> +};

[Severity: Medium]
Is this missing from include/linux/mod_devicetable.h? Without adding
rpmi_tee_device_id to mod_devicetable.h and scripts/mod/file2alias.c, modpost
will silently ignore MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(rpmi_tee, ...) in consumer drivers.
Will this break udev-based automatic module loading for TEE service drivers?

[ ... ]
> +#if IS_REACHABLE(CONFIG_RISCV_RPMI_TEE_TRANSPORT)
> +struct rpmi_tee_device *
> +rpmi_tee_device_register(const uuid_t *uuid, u32 endpoint_id,
> +			 const struct rpmi_tee_ops *ops, struct device *parent);
[ ... ]
> +#else
> +static inline struct rpmi_tee_device *
> +rpmi_tee_device_register(const uuid_t *uuid, u32 endpoint_id,
> +			 const struct rpmi_tee_ops *ops, struct device *parent)
> +{
> +	return NULL;
> +}

[Severity: High]
Does this fallback stub break IS_ERR() expectations? The actual implementation
of rpmi_tee_device_register() returns an ERR_PTR() on failure, and callers
typically check the return value using IS_ERR().

Since IS_ERR(NULL) evaluates to false, will callers assume device registration
succeeded and attempt to dereference the NULL pointer? Should this stub return
an error pointer such as ERR_PTR(-ENODEV) instead?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261007-riscv-rpmi-tee-abi-v2-0-45939a13d223@oss.qualcomm.com?part=3

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-08  3:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-08  3:27 [PATCH RFC v2 00/10] firmware: riscv: add RPMI TEE service group transport Amirreza Zarrabi
2026-10-08  3:27 ` [PATCH RFC v2 01/10] mailbox: add direct synchronous send support Amirreza Zarrabi
2026-10-08  3:39   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-08  3:27 ` [PATCH RFC v2 02/10] mailbox: mpxy: add direct synchronous send Amirreza Zarrabi
2026-10-08  3:38   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-08  3:27 ` [PATCH RFC v2 03/10] firmware: add RPMI TEE bus support Amirreza Zarrabi
2026-10-08  3:38   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-10-08  3:27 ` [PATCH RFC v2 04/10] dt-bindings: firmware: add RISC-V RPMI TEE transport Amirreza Zarrabi
2026-10-08  3:27 ` [PATCH RFC v2 05/10] firmware: add RPMI TEE transport core Amirreza Zarrabi
2026-10-08  3:27 ` [PATCH RFC v2 06/10] firmware: riscv: rpmi-tee: discover TEE endpoints Amirreza Zarrabi
2026-10-08  3:27 ` [PATCH RFC v2 07/10] firmware: riscv: rpmi-tee: register TEE services and support calls Amirreza Zarrabi
2026-10-08  3:27 ` [PATCH RFC v2 08/10] firmware: riscv: rpmi-tee: cache TEE capabilities Amirreza Zarrabi
2026-10-08  3:27 ` [PATCH RFC v2 09/10] firmware: riscv: rpmi-tee: add memory parcel operations Amirreza Zarrabi
2026-10-08  3:54   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-08  3:27 ` [PATCH RFC v2 10/10] firmware: riscv: rpmi-tee: add signal bus support Amirreza Zarrabi
2026-10-08  3:56   ` 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=sashiko-outbox-163566@kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=amirreza.zarrabi@oss.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=devicetree@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