[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260128022549.4151341-1-kuba@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2026 18:25:49 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: lukasz.majewski@...lbox.org
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
festevam@...il.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
s.hauer@...gutronix.de,
kernel@...gutronix.de,
horms@...nel.org,
shawnguo@...nel.org,
imx@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
conor+dt@...nel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
wahrenst@....net,
pabeni@...hat.com,
davem@...emloft.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
richardcochran@...il.com,
edumazet@...gle.com,
andrew+netdev@...n.ch,
robh@...nel.org,
krzk+dt@...nel.org,
andrew@...n.ch
Subject: Re: [net-next,v20,2/7] net: mtip: The L2 switch driver for imx287
This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.
For local reproduction steps see https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/ai-local.html
---
net: mtip: The L2 switch driver for imx287
This patch adds support for the More Than IP L2 switch embedded in the
imx287 SoC. It creates a two-port switch driver that can be used
interchangeably with the FEC driver.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/mtipsw/mtipl2sw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/mtipsw/mtipl2sw.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..03c5163d6508
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/mtipsw/mtipl2sw.c
[ ... ]
> +static void mtip_netif_stop_queues(struct switch_enet_private *fep)
> +{
> + for (int i = 0; i < SWITCH_EPORT_NUMBER; i++)
> + netif_stop_queue(fep->ndev[0]);
^^^
Should this be fep->ndev[i] instead of fep->ndev[0]? The loop iterates
with variable i but always uses index 0, so port 1's queue is never
stopped.
> +}
> +
> +static void mtip_netif_wake_queues(struct switch_enet_private *fep)
> +{
> + for (int i = 0; i < SWITCH_EPORT_NUMBER; i++)
> + netif_wake_queue(fep->ndev[0]);
^^^
Same here - should this be fep->ndev[i]?
> +}
[ ... ]
> +static int mtip_mii_probe(struct net_device *dev)
> +{
> + struct mtip_ndev_priv *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> + struct switch_enet_private *fep = priv->fep;
> + struct phy_device *phy_dev = NULL;
> + int port_idx = priv->portnum - 1;
> +
> + if (fep->phy_np[port_idx]) {
> + phy_dev = of_phy_connect(dev, fep->phy_np[port_idx],
> + &mtip_adjust_link, 0,
> + fep->phy_interface[port_idx]);
> + if (!phy_dev) {
> + netdev_err(dev, "Unable to connect to phy\n");
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + phy_set_max_speed(phy_dev, 100);
^^^^^^^
If fep->phy_np[port_idx] is NULL (no phy-handle in DT for this port),
the if block is skipped and phy_dev remains NULL. Can this cause a NULL
pointer dereference in phy_set_max_speed()?
> + fep->phy_dev[port_idx] = phy_dev;
[ ... ]
> +static int mtip_parse_of(struct switch_enet_private *fep,
> + struct device_node *np)
> +{
> + struct device_node *p;
> + unsigned int port_num;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + p = of_get_child_by_name(np, "ethernet-ports");
> +
> + for_each_available_child_of_node_scoped(p, port) {
> + if (of_property_read_u32(port, "reg", &port_num))
> + continue;
> +
> + if (port_num > SWITCH_EPORT_NUMBER) {
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This only validates the upper bound. If the device tree contains
reg = <0>, would fep->mac[port_num - 1] access fep->mac[-1]? Perhaps
the check should also verify port_num is at least 1?
> + dev_err(&fep->pdev->dev,
> + "%s: The switch supports up to %d ports!\n",
> + __func__, SWITCH_EPORT_NUMBER);
> + goto of_get_err;
> + }
> +
> + fep->n_ports = port_num;
> + ret = of_get_mac_address(port, &fep->mac[port_num - 1][0]);
[ ... ]
> + ret = mtip_mii_init(fep, pdev);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "%s: Cannot init phy bus (%d)!\n", __func__,
> + ret);
> + goto dma_free_coherent_memory;
> + }
> +
> + ret = mtip_ndev_init(fep, pdev);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "%s: Failed to create virtual ndev (%d)\n",
> + __func__, ret);
> + goto mdiobus_free_memory;
> + }
[ ... ]
> + mdiobus_free_memory:
> + mdiobus_free(fep->mii_bus);
mtip_mii_init() calls of_mdiobus_register() which registers the bus.
Should mdiobus_unregister() be called here before mdiobus_free()?
Compare with mtip_mii_remove() which does call mdiobus_unregister().
> + dma_free_coherent_memory:
> + dma_free_coherent(&fep->pdev->dev, PAGE_SIZE, fep->rx_bd_base,
> + fep->bd_dma);
> + fep->rx_bd_base = NULL;
> + fep->tx_bd_base = NULL;
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static void mtip_sw_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct switch_enet_private *fep = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> +
> + mtip_ndev_cleanup(fep);
> +
> + mtip_mii_remove(fep);
> +
> + timer_delete_sync(&fep->timer_mgnt);
> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL);
> +}
mtip_sw_probe() allocates DMA memory with dma_alloc_coherent() in
mtip_switch_dma_init(), but mtip_sw_remove() does not appear to free it.
Is this a memory leak on driver removal?
--
pw-bot: cr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists