From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Akhil R" <akhilrajeev@nvidia.com>
Cc: linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/13] i3c: master: Use unified device property interface
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2026 11:53:04 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260409115305.0918CC4CEF7@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260409105747.48158-4-akhilrajeev@nvidia.com>
Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s):
- [High] I3C master registration unconditionally fails on ACPI systems if child nodes are present, breaking existing ACPI support.
- [High] Failure during device registration leaves a dangling pointer in `desc->dev`, leading to a Use-After-Free and Double Free during bus teardown.
- [High] Erroneous consumption of the `boardinfo` fwnode reference during device release causes a reference underflow and potential Use-After-Free.
--
commit 97e72c86c4ba51a8b484696ee0603781ab0f1651
Author: Akhil R <akhilrajeev@nvidia.com>
Subject: i3c: master: Use unified device property interface
This commit replaces OF-specific functions with unified device property
functions to prepare for supporting both ACPI and device tree.
> diff --git a/drivers/i3c/master.c b/drivers/i3c/master.c
> --- a/drivers/i3c/master.c
> +++ b/drivers/i3c/master.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -995,7 +997,7 @@ static void i3c_device_release(struct device *dev)
>
> WARN_ON(i3cdev->desc);
>
> - of_node_put(i3cdev->dev.of_node);
> + fwnode_handle_put(dev->fwnode);
> kfree(i3cdev);
> }
[ ... ]
> @@ -1783,7 +1785,7 @@ i3c_master_register_new_i3c_devs(struct i3c_master_controller *master)
> desc->info.pid);
>
> if (desc->boardinfo)
> - desc->dev->dev.of_node = desc->boardinfo->of_node;
> + device_set_node(&desc->dev->dev, desc->boardinfo->fwnode);
>
> ret = device_register(&desc->dev->dev);
> if (ret) {
Will this cause a reference underflow on the boardinfo fwnode?
When the device is registered, device_set_node() assigns the fwnode without
taking an extra reference. If the device is released (for instance, in the
device_register error path shown above), i3c_device_release() calls
fwnode_handle_put(). This consumes the reference that is actually owned by
boardinfo.
If the device is later rediscovered via hot-join, it could match the same
boardinfo and use the freed fwnode, resulting in a use-after-free.
Additionally, does this error path leave a dangling pointer in desc->dev?
While this is a pre-existing issue, if device_register() fails, it calls
put_device() which triggers i3c_device_release() and frees desc->dev via
kfree(). However, desc->dev is not set to NULL. Later during teardown,
i3c_master_unregister_i3c_devs() might skip the !i3cdev->dev check, write
to the freed memory, and call put_device() again, causing a double-free.
[ ... ]
> @@ -2402,8 +2404,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked);
> #define OF_I3C_REG1_IS_I2C_DEV BIT(31)
>
> static int
> -of_i3c_master_add_i2c_boardinfo(struct i3c_master_controller *master,
> - struct device_node *node, u32 *reg)
> +i3c_master_add_i2c_boardinfo(struct i3c_master_controller *master,
> + struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, u32 *reg)
> {
> struct i2c_dev_boardinfo *boardinfo;
> struct device *dev = &master->dev;
> @@ -2413,9 +2415,13 @@ of_i3c_master_add_i2c_boardinfo(struct i3c_master_controller *master,
> if (!boardinfo)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> - ret = of_i2c_get_board_info(dev, node, &boardinfo->base);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
> + if (is_of_node(fwnode)) {
> + ret = of_i2c_get_board_info(dev, to_of_node(fwnode), &boardinfo->base);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + } else {
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
[ ... ]
> -static int of_populate_i3c_bus(struct i3c_master_controller *master)
> +static int fwnode_populate_i3c_bus(struct i3c_master_controller *master)
> {
> struct device *dev = &master->dev;
> - struct device_node *i3cbus_np = dev->of_node;
> + struct fwnode_handle *fwnode = dev_fwnode(dev);
> int ret;
> u32 val;
>
> - if (!i3cbus_np)
> + if (!fwnode)
> return 0;
>
> - for_each_available_child_of_node_scoped(i3cbus_np, node) {
> - ret = of_i3c_master_add_dev(master, node);
> + fwnode_for_each_available_child_node_scoped(fwnode, child) {
> + ret = i3c_master_add_dev(master, child);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> }
Does this change break I3C master registration on ACPI systems?
Previously, of_populate_i3c_bus() would return 0 on ACPI platforms because
dev->of_node was NULL. Now, fwnode_populate_i3c_bus() unconditionally
iterates over all ACPI child nodes.
Since i3c_master_add_dev() expects a device tree style reg property (which
ACPI nodes typically lack in favor of _CRS or _ADR), reading it may fail.
Additionally, if a child is identified as an I2C device, the new
i3c_master_add_i2c_boardinfo() explicitly returns -EINVAL for non-OF nodes.
These errors will propagate up and completely abort i3c_master_register().
Even if ACPI support is fixed in a subsequent commit, could this intermediate
patch break bisectability by causing the controller to fail probing?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260409105747.48158-1-akhilrajeev@nvidia.com?part=3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-09 11:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-09 10:57 [PATCH v2 00/13] Support ACPI and SETAASA device discovery Akhil R
2026-04-09 10:57 ` [PATCH v2 01/13] dt-bindings: i3c: Add mipi-i3c-static-method to support SETAASA Akhil R
2026-04-09 11:14 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-10 2:00 ` Frank Li
2026-04-10 4:30 ` Akhil R
2026-04-09 10:57 ` [PATCH v2 02/13] ACPICA: Read LVR from the I2C resource descriptor Akhil R
2026-04-09 11:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-04-09 11:20 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-10 2:04 ` Frank Li
2026-04-10 4:45 ` Akhil R
2026-04-10 10:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-04-10 10:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2026-04-09 10:57 ` [PATCH v2 03/13] i3c: master: Use unified device property interface Akhil R
2026-04-09 11:53 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-04-09 10:57 ` [PATCH v2 04/13] i3c: master: Support ACPI enumeration of child devices Akhil R
2026-04-09 11:43 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-10 2:17 ` Frank Li
2026-04-10 5:31 ` Akhil R
2026-04-09 10:57 ` [PATCH v2 05/13] i3c: master: Add support for devices using SETAASA Akhil R
2026-04-09 11:45 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-10 2:25 ` Frank Li
2026-04-09 10:57 ` [PATCH v2 06/13] i3c: master: Add support for devices without PID Akhil R
2026-04-09 12:08 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-10 2:37 ` Frank Li
2026-04-09 10:57 ` [PATCH v2 07/13] i3c: master: match I3C device through DT and ACPI Akhil R
2026-04-10 2:40 ` Frank Li
2026-04-09 10:57 ` [PATCH v2 08/13] i3c: dw-i3c-master: Add SETAASA as supported CCC Akhil R
2026-04-10 2:41 ` Frank Li
2026-04-09 10:57 ` [PATCH v2 09/13] i3c: dw-i3c-master: Add a quirk to skip clock and reset Akhil R
2026-04-09 11:51 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-10 2:45 ` Frank Li
2026-04-10 6:07 ` Akhil R
2026-04-09 10:57 ` [PATCH v2 10/13] i3c: dw-i3c-master: Add ACPI ID for Tegra410 Akhil R
2026-04-10 2:47 ` Frank Li
2026-04-09 10:57 ` [PATCH v2 11/13] hwmon: spd5118: Remove 16-bit addressing Akhil R
2026-04-09 14:11 ` Guenter Roeck
2026-04-09 10:57 ` [PATCH v2 12/13] hwmon: spd5118: Add I3C support Akhil R
2026-04-09 12:36 ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-09 14:15 ` Guenter Roeck
2026-04-09 14:19 ` Guenter Roeck
2026-04-09 10:57 ` [PATCH v2 13/13] arm64: defconfig: Enable I3C and SPD5118 hwmon Akhil R
2026-04-10 6:39 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2026-04-10 6:57 ` Guenter Roeck
2026-04-10 7:18 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2026-04-10 8:37 ` Akhil R
2026-04-10 9:57 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2026-04-10 7:04 ` Akhil R
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=20260409115305.0918CC4CEF7@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=akhilrajeev@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-hwmon@vger.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