From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "AngeloGioacchino Del Regno" <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Cc: linux-phy@lists.infradead.org, vkoul@kernel.org,
neil.armstrong@linaro.org, olteanv@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 06/11] nvmem: qcom-spmi-sdam: Migrate to devm_spmi_subdevice_alloc_and_add()
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2026 08:50:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260707085022.4788A1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260707083730.33977-7-angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:
New issues:
- [High] The reference to the parent SPMI device acquired via `spmi_find_device_by_of_node()` is leaked on both success and error paths.
- [Low] Returning a pointer (`ERR_PTR`) from an integer-returning function causes a type mismatch and build warning.
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] The upper half of the SDAM memory cannot be accessed via the nvmem API due to a bound restriction mismatch.
--
--- Patch [6]: [PATCH v10 06/11] nvmem: qcom-spmi-sdam: Migrate to devm_spmi_subdevice_alloc_and_add() ---
commit 8fe2831bc2e512389dd631ef16ab000bbe8f6706
Author: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
nvmem: qcom-spmi-sdam: Migrate to devm_spmi_subdevice_alloc_and_add()
Some Qualcomm PMICs integrate a SDAM device, internally located in
a specific address range reachable through SPMI communication.
Instead of using the parent SPMI device (the main PMIC) as a kind
of syscon in this driver, register a new SPMI sub-device for SDAM
and initialize its own regmap with this sub-device's specific base
address, retrieved from the devicetree.
> diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/qcom-spmi-sdam.c b/drivers/nvmem/qcom-spmi-sdam.c
> index 4f1cca6eab71e..3ad842676dde5 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvmem/qcom-spmi-sdam.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvmem/qcom-spmi-sdam.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -110,28 +110,47 @@ static int sdam_write(void *priv, unsigned int offset, void *val,
>
> static int sdam_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> + struct regmap_config sdam_regmap_config = {
> + .reg_bits = 16,
> + .val_bits = 8,
> + .max_register = 0xff,
> + .fast_io = true,
> + };
> struct sdam_chip *sdam;
> struct nvmem_device *nvmem;
> + struct spmi_device *sparent;
> + struct spmi_subdevice *sub_sdev;
> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> unsigned int val;
> int rc;
>
> + if (!dev->parent)
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> sdam = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*sdam), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!sdam)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> - sdam->regmap = dev_get_regmap(pdev->dev.parent, NULL);
> - if (!sdam->regmap) {
> - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get regmap handle\n");
> - return -ENXIO;
> - }
> + sparent = spmi_find_device_by_of_node(dev->parent->of_node);
> + if (!sparent)
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
[Severity: Low]
Does returning ERR_PTR(-ENODEV) here cause a compiler warning?
Since sdam_probe() returns an int, this implicitly casts a pointer to an
integer. This triggers a -Wint-conversion warning, which results in a build
failure on modern compiler configurations using -Werror=int-conversion.
[Severity: High]
Does this code leak the sparent device reference?
spmi_find_device_by_of_node() internally invokes bus_find_device_by_of_node(),
which returns a device with an incremented reference count via get_device().
I don't see a corresponding put_device(&sparent->dev) on the success or
error paths before returning from sdam_probe(). Because
devm_spmi_subdevice_alloc_and_add() registers the device but does not assume
ownership of this specific reference, the parent PMIC device object appears
to be permanently leaked on every probe.
> +
> + sub_sdev = devm_spmi_subdevice_alloc_and_add(dev, sparent);
> + if (IS_ERR(sub_sdev))
> + return PTR_ERR(sub_sdev);
[ ... ]
> @@ -159,7 +178,7 @@ static int sdam_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> }
> dev_dbg(&pdev->dev,
> "SDAM base=%#x size=%u registered successfully\n",
> - sdam->base, sdam->size);
> + sdam_regmap_config.reg_base, sdam->size);
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does setting the nvmem framework size limit
to sdam->size earlier in this function restrict the maximum readable offsets
incorrectly?
The driver maps physical memory starting at SDAM_MEM_START (0x40), and
sdam_is_valid() mandates that the input offset must be >= 0x40.
However, configuring sdam->sdam_config.size = sdam->size forces nvmem
consumers to pass an offset strictly less than sdam->size. This permits
access to only a fraction of the intended size, completely blocking access
to the upper portion of the SDAM memory block which are valid physical
SDAM registers approved by sdam_is_valid().
>
> return 0;
> }
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260707083730.33977-1-angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com?part=6
--
linux-phy mailing list
linux-phy@lists.infradead.org
https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-phy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-07 8:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-07 8:37 [PATCH v10 00/11] SPMI: Implement sub-devices and migrate drivers AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2026-07-07 8:37 ` [PATCH v10 01/11] spmi: Fix potential use-after-free by grabbing of_node reference AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2026-07-07 8:53 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-07 9:07 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-07-07 8:37 ` [PATCH v10 02/11] spmi: Remove redundant dev_name() print in spmi_device_add() AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2026-07-07 8:37 ` [PATCH v10 03/11] spmi: Print error status with %pe format AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2026-07-07 8:37 ` [PATCH v10 04/11] spmi: Remove unneeded goto in spmi_device_add() error path AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2026-07-07 8:48 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-07 8:37 ` [PATCH v10 05/11] spmi: Implement spmi_subdevice_alloc_and_add() and devm variant AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2026-07-07 8:48 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-07 8:37 ` [PATCH v10 06/11] nvmem: qcom-spmi-sdam: Migrate to devm_spmi_subdevice_alloc_and_add() AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2026-07-07 8:50 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-07 8:37 ` [PATCH v10 07/11] power: reset: qcom-pon: " AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2026-07-07 8:49 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-07 8:37 ` [PATCH v10 08/11] phy: qualcomm: eusb2-repeater: " AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2026-07-07 8:51 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-07 8:37 ` [PATCH v10 09/11] misc: qcom-coincell: " AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2026-07-07 8:56 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-07 8:37 ` [PATCH v10 10/11] iio: adc: qcom-spmi-iadc: " AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2026-07-07 9:03 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-07 8:37 ` [PATCH v10 11/11] iio: adc: qcom-spmi-iadc: Remove regmap R/W wrapper functions AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
2026-07-07 8:55 ` 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=20260707085022.4788A1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com \
--cc=linux-phy@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=neil.armstrong@linaro.org \
--cc=olteanv@gmail.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
/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