From: netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org
To: bastien.curutchet@bootlin.com
Cc: woojung.huh@microchip.com, UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com,
andrew@lunn.ch, olteanv@gmail.com, davem@davemloft.net,
edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
richardcochran@gmail.com, pascal.eberhard@se.com,
miquel.raynal@bootlin.com, thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 10/10] net: dsa: microchip: add periodic output support for the KSZ8463
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 10:30:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <178903621782.219967.1067616730052651942@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260908-ksz-perout-v3-10-6722a3f1ca75@bootlin.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential
issue(s) to consider:
Critical: 0 · High: 1 (2) · Medium: 2 · Low: 1
- [High] KSZ8463 advertises 12 periodic-output channels (.n_pins = 12,
.n_per_out = 12, copied into caps by ksz8463_ptp_set_caps()) while the…
- [Medium] ksz8463_ptp_enable_perout() is not transactional: it calls
ksz8463_ptp_tou_reset(dev, request->index) (stopping an already…
- [Medium] ksz8463_ptp_configure_perout() dereferences
dev->ptp_data.pin_config[index]…
- [Low] ksz8463_ptp_set_caps() (drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_ptp.c:1335)
does not set ptp_data->caps.supported_perout_flags, while the code…
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] The new KSZ8463 settime/adjtime paths funnel into
ksz_ptp_prepare_restart_perout(), whose catch-up arithmetic can…
- [High] A denormalized periodic-output period is accepted as zero
nanoseconds and later causes a kernel divide-by-zero or an infinite…
--
net: dsa: microchip: add periodic output support for the KSZ8463
This adds KSZ8463 specific periodic output handling: per-unit trigger
configuration registers, a smaller maximum pulse width, and a new set of
ksz8463_* PTP callbacks installed by ksz8463_ptp_set_caps(). The chip
data now advertises 12 pins and 12 periodic output channels.
A few questions below about the new paths.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c b/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c
> index 041bb4f963659..9e234ad71b723 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c
> @@ -1161,6 +1161,8 @@ const struct ksz_chip_data ksz_switch_chips[] = {
> .supports_mii = {false, false, true},
> .supports_rmii = {false, false, true},
> .internal_phy = {true, true, false},
> + .n_pins = 12,
> + .n_per_out = 12,
> },
[Severity: High]
Twelve periodic output channels are advertised here, but struct
ksz_ptp_data still keeps only one set of perout state (a single tou_mode,
one perout_target_time_first, one perout_period), and the restart helper
always rebuilds a request for channel 0:
drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_ptp.c:ksz_ptp_prepare_restart_perout() {
...
request->index = 0;
request->flags = 0;
return 0;
}
Userspace can map pin 3 to PTP_PF_PEROUT chan 3 (ptp_set_pinfunc() only
checks chan < n_per_out, and ksz_ptp_verify_pin() accepts any PEROUT
pin/chan) and then arm PTP_PEROUT_REQUEST with index 3, which makes
ksz8463_ptp_enable_perout() program trigger unit 3 and set tou_mode =
KSZ_PTP_TOU_PEROUT.
The next clock_settime() then walks:
ksz8463_ptp_settime() -> ksz8463_ptp_restart_perout() ->
ksz_ptp_prepare_restart_perout() (index = 0) ->
ksz8463_ptp_enable_perout() -> ksz_ptp_get_pin() ->
ptp_find_pin(clock, PTP_PF_PEROUT, 0)
With no pin mapped to chan 0 that returns -1 and ksz_ptp_get_pin() returns
-EINVAL. Does that mean every clock_settime()/clock_adjtime() fails for as
long as a perout is armed on a channel other than 0?
And because the failure takes the goto unlock path after
__ksz_ptp_settime() has already loaded the hardware RTC, is
ptp_data->clock_time (used by ksz_tstamp_reconstruct()) left behind until
ksz_ptp_do_aux_work() happens to run?
If some pin is mapped to chan 0, the restart resets and re-arms unit 0 with
the last stored period and target instead, while the unit that is actually
running keeps its old absolute 32-bit target and is never re-armed. Is
that intended?
There are two related effects: enabling a second channel overwrites the
stored period/target of the first, and disabling any single channel sets
the global tou_mode to KSZ_PTP_TOU_IDLE, after which clock steps take the
IDLE branch and the units still set in KSZ8463_TOU_EN are never
resynchronised. Should the perout state become per-channel before
n_per_out = 12 is exposed?
> diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_ptp.c b/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_ptp.c
> index 0a77b46cfad25..d33034892a8f6 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_ptp.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_ptp.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -120,6 +132,28 @@ static int ksz_ptp_tou_target_time_set(struct ksz_device *dev,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int ksz8463_ptp_tou_start(struct ksz_device *dev, u8 unit)
> +{
> + u16 data;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = ksz_rmw16(dev, KSZ8463_TOU_EN, BIT(unit), BIT(unit));
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = ksz_read16(dev, KSZ8463_TOU_ACTIVE, &data);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + if (!(data & BIT(unit))) {
> + dev_err(dev->dev, "%s: Trigger unit%d error!\n", __func__,
> + unit);
> + return -EIO;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
[ ... ]
> @@ -147,6 +181,56 @@ static int ksz_ptp_tou_start(struct ksz_device *dev, u8 unit)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int ksz8463_ptp_configure_perout(struct ksz_device *dev,
> + u32 cycle_width_ns, u32 pulse_width_ns,
> + struct timespec64 const *target_time,
> + u8 index)
> +{
> + struct ptp_pin_desc *pin = &dev->ptp_data.pin_config[index];
> + u16 cfg_base = KSZ8463_TRIG1_CFG + KSZ8463_TRIGN_CFG_SIZE * pin->chan;
[Severity: Medium]
Is pin_config safe to read here with only ptp_data->lock held? pin->chan
selects which trigger unit's register block gets rewritten, and
drivers/ptp/ptp_private.h documents the lock for that array as:
struct mutex pincfg_mux; /* protect concurrent info->pin_config access */
The core holds pincfg_mux around ->enable() only, not around
->settime64()/->adjtime(). So on the new paths:
CPU0: clock_settime() -> ksz8463_ptp_settime() (takes ptp_data->lock only)
-> ksz8463_ptp_restart_perout() -> ksz8463_ptp_enable_perout()
-> ksz_ptp_get_pin() -> ptp_find_pin() -> ksz8463_ptp_configure_perout()
reads pin_config[index].chan / .index
CPU1: PTP_PIN_SETFUNC -> ptp_set_pinfunc() (holds pincfg_mux) writes
if (pin1) {
ptp_disable_pinfunc(info, func, chan);
pin1->func = PTP_PF_NONE;
pin1->chan = 0;
}
...
pin2->func = func;
pin2->chan = chan;
Those stores happen after ptp_disable_pinfunc() has already returned from
ksz8463_ptp_enable() and released ptp_data->lock, and for func ==
PTP_PF_NONE no ->enable() call happens at all, so ptp_data->lock does not
close the window. Can cfg_base then point at a different, possibly
active, trigger unit than the one reset and enabled via request->index and
silently rewrite its configuration?
Note that taking pincfg_mux inside ptp_data->lock would invert the order
the core establishes in ptp_set_pinfunc() -> ptp_disable_pinfunc() ->
ksz8463_ptp_enable(); caching the pin/chan under ptp_data->lock at
enable() time looks like it would avoid that.
> + u16 data;
> + int ret;
> +
> + /* Hardware has only 32 bit */
> + if ((target_time->tv_sec & 0xffffffff) != target_time->tv_sec)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + data = KSZ8463_NOTIFY_BIT |
> + FIELD_PREP(KSZ8463_PATTERN_M, TRIG_POS_PERIOD) |
> + pin->index;
> + ret = ksz_write16(dev, cfg_base + KSZ8463_PATTERN_OFF, data);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
[ ... ]
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
[ ... ]
> @@ -241,6 +325,58 @@ static u64 ksz_ptp_compute_perout_pulse(struct ksz_device *dev,
> return min_t(u64, req_pulse_width_ns, max_pulse_width);
> }
>
> +static int ksz8463_ptp_enable_perout(struct ksz_device *dev,
> + struct ptp_perout_request const *request,
> + int on)
> +{
> + struct ksz_ptp_data *ptp_data = &dev->ptp_data;
> + u64 cycle_width_ns;
> + u64 pulse_width_ns;
> + int pin;
> + int ret;
> +
> + pin = ksz_ptp_get_pin(dev, request);
> + if (pin < 0)
> + return pin;
> +
> + ret = ksz8463_ptp_tou_reset(dev, request->index);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + if (!on) {
> + ptp_data->tou_mode = KSZ_PTP_TOU_IDLE;
> + return 0;
> + }
> + ret = ksz_ptp_compute_perout_cycle(dev, request, &cycle_width_ns);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
[Severity: Medium]
Is there a way back out of this sequence when a request is rejected? The
running unit is reset before the request is validated, and
ksz_ptp_compute_perout_cycle() overwrites the saved schedule before it can
reject the period:
drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_ptp.c:ksz_ptp_compute_perout_cycle() {
ptp_data->perout_target_time_first.tv_sec = request->start.sec;
...
*cycle_width_ns = timespec64_to_ns(&ptp_data->perout_period);
if ((*cycle_width_ns & TRIG_CYCLE_WIDTH_M) != *cycle_width_ns) {
*cycle_width_ns = 0;
return -EINVAL;
}
}
So with a perout already running, a PTP_PEROUT_REQUEST carrying a period
whose ns value does not fit 32 bits (period.sec >= 5) resets trigger unit
N, stores the rejected start/period, and returns -EINVAL, while tou_mode
stays KSZ_PTP_TOU_PEROUT from the previous successful enable. Does every
later clock_settime()/clock_adjtime() then take the PEROUT branch, call
ksz8463_ptp_restart_perout() with the rejected parameters, fail again, and
jump to unlock after the RTC has already been written but before
ptp_data->clock_time is updated?
The same applies to the -EINVAL/-ERANGE returns from
ksz_ptp_tou_pulse_verify(), the 32-bit target check in
ksz8463_ptp_configure_perout(), any regmap error, and the -EIO from
ksz8463_ptp_tou_start().
Related: ksz8463_ptp_tou_start() sets KSZ8463_TOU_EN before reading
KSZ8463_TOU_ACTIVE and does not clear the enable bit when the read fails
or ACTIVE is not set, so does an operation reported as -EIO leave the unit
enabled in hardware?
> + pulse_width_ns = ksz_ptp_compute_perout_pulse(dev, request,
> + KSZ8463_MAX_PULSE_WIDTH);
> +
> + ret = ksz_ptp_tou_pulse_verify(pulse_width_ns,
> + KSZ8463_TRIG_PULSE_WIDTH_M);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = ksz8463_ptp_configure_perout(dev, cycle_width_ns, pulse_width_ns,
> + &ptp_data->perout_target_time_first,
> + pin);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = ksz_ptp_tou_gpio(dev);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = ksz8463_ptp_tou_start(dev, request->index);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ptp_data->tou_mode = KSZ_PTP_TOU_PEROUT;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
[ ... ]
> @@ -845,6 +981,18 @@ static int ksz_ptp_restart_perout(struct ksz_device *dev)
> return ksz_ptp_enable_perout(dev, &request, 1);
> }
>
> +static int ksz8463_ptp_restart_perout(struct ksz_device *dev)
> +{
> + struct ptp_perout_request request;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = ksz_ptp_prepare_restart_perout(dev, &request);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but the helper reached from here
truncates the catch-up quotient to 32 bits, and this adds a second entry
point into it:
drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_ptp.c:ksz_ptp_prepare_restart_perout() {
unsigned int count;
...
if (first_ns < now_ns) {
count = div_u64(now_ns - first_ns, period_ns);
next_ns = first_ns + count * period_ns;
} else {
next_ns = first_ns;
}
/* Ensure 100 ms guard time prior next event */
while (next_ns < now_ns + 100000000)
next_ns += period_ns;
}
count is only unsigned int, so once the true number of elapsed periods
passes 2^32, next_ns is left roughly 2^32 * period_ns in the past and the
guard loop advances one period per iteration, with ptp_data->lock held, in
ioctl context, and without cond_resched().
Small periods are accepted (TRIG_CYCLE_WIDTH_M is GENMASK(31, 0), and a
1 us period yields a 500 ns pulse that passes ksz_ptp_tou_pulse_verify()),
so a perout with a 1 us period armed a day earlier gives a true quotient
around 8.6e10. Can the next clock_settime() ->
ksz8463_ptp_settime() -> ksz8463_ptp_restart_perout() then spin for that
many iterations under the PTP mutex, producing RCU stalls or soft lockups
and blocking every other PTP operation on the device?
Write access to /dev/ptpN is enough to reach both steps, since posix
dynamic clocks only require FMODE_WRITE. Would widening count, or
bounding the accepted period, be worth doing here?
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue in the same shared helper, but the new
KSZ8463 clock update paths make it reachable for this chip too: a
denormalized period is accepted as zero nanoseconds.
PTP_PEROUT_REQUEST does not check that struct ptp_clock_time is
normalized, and the core enables the output because the fields are
nonzero:
drivers/ptp/ptp_chardev.c:ptp_perout_request() {
...
return ops->enable(ops, &req, perout->period.sec || perout->period.nsec);
}
So period.sec = -1 with period.nsec = 1000000000 reaches
ksz8463_ptp_enable_perout() with on = 1, ksz_ptp_compute_perout_cycle()
stores those raw fields into ptp_data->perout_period, timespec64_to_ns()
is 0, and 0 passes both the TRIG_CYCLE_WIDTH_M test and
ksz_ptp_tou_pulse_verify().
With a stored period of 0 and tou_mode still KSZ_PTP_TOU_PEROUT from an
earlier successful enable, the next clock_settime()/clock_adjtime() reaches
ksz_ptp_prepare_restart_perout():
if (first_ns < now_ns) {
count = div_u64(now_ns - first_ns, period_ns);
Does this divide by zero and Oops with ptp_data->lock held? And in the
other branch, does
while (next_ns < now_ns + 100000000)
next_ns += period_ns;
add zero forever? Would a normalized, strictly positive period check in
ksz_ptp_compute_perout_cycle() cover both cases?
> +
> + return ksz8463_ptp_enable_perout(dev, &request, 1);
> +}
> +
[ ... ]
> @@ -871,6 +1019,41 @@ static int __ksz_ptp_settime(struct ksz_device *dev,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int ksz8463_ptp_settime(struct ptp_clock_info *ptp,
> + const struct timespec64 *ts)
> +{
> + struct ksz_ptp_data *ptp_data = ptp_caps_to_data(ptp);
> + struct ksz_device *dev = ptp_data_to_ksz_dev(ptp_data);
> + int ret;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&ptp_data->lock);
> +
> + ret = __ksz_ptp_settime(dev, ts);
> + if (ret)
> + goto unlock;
> +
> + switch (ptp_data->tou_mode) {
> + case KSZ_PTP_TOU_IDLE:
> + break;
> +
> + case KSZ_PTP_TOU_PEROUT:
> + ret = ksz8463_ptp_restart_perout(dev);
> + if (ret)
> + goto unlock;
> +
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + spin_lock_bh(&ptp_data->clock_lock);
> + ptp_data->clock_time = *ts;
> + spin_unlock_bh(&ptp_data->clock_lock);
> +
> +unlock:
> + mutex_unlock(&ptp_data->lock);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
[ ... ]
> @@ -1095,6 +1332,27 @@ static int ksz_ptp_start_clock(struct ksz_device *dev)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +void ksz8463_ptp_set_caps(struct dsa_switch *ds)
> +{
> + struct ksz_device *dev = ds->priv;
> + struct ksz_ptp_data *ptp_data;
> +
> + ptp_data = &dev->ptp_data;
> +
> + ptp_data->caps.owner = THIS_MODULE;
> + snprintf(ptp_data->caps.name, 16, "Microchip Clock");
> + ptp_data->caps.max_adj = KSZ_MAX_DRIFT_CORR;
> + ptp_data->caps.gettime64 = ksz_ptp_gettime;
> + ptp_data->caps.settime64 = ksz8463_ptp_settime;
> + ptp_data->caps.adjfine = ksz_ptp_adjfine;
> + ptp_data->caps.adjtime = ksz8463_ptp_adjtime;
> + ptp_data->caps.do_aux_work = ksz_ptp_do_aux_work;
> + ptp_data->caps.enable = ksz8463_ptp_enable;
> + ptp_data->caps.verify = ksz_ptp_verify_pin;
> + ptp_data->caps.n_pins = dev->info->n_pins;
> + ptp_data->caps.n_per_out = dev->info->n_per_out;
> +}
> +
[Severity: Low]
supported_perout_flags is not set here, while the path installed by this
function implements PTP_PEROUT_DUTY_CYCLE: ksz_ptp_get_pin() only rejects
flags outside PTP_PEROUT_DUTY_CYCLE, and
ksz_ptp_compute_perout_pulse() consumes request->on:
if (request->flags & PTP_PEROUT_DUTY_CYCLE)
return request->on.sec * NSEC_PER_SEC + request->on.nsec;
The core rejects the ioctl before ->enable() runs:
drivers/ptp/ptp_chardev.c:ptp_perout_request() {
if (perout->flags & ~ops->supported_perout_flags)
return -EOPNOTSUPP;
}
So does every PTP_PEROUT_REQUEST2 with PTP_PEROUT_DUTY_CYCLE fail with
-EOPNOTSUPP, leaving the duty cycle handling unreachable? The same
omission exists in ksz_ptp_set_caps(), so the KSZ8463 is no worse than the
other chips, but should the new initializer either set
supported_perout_flags = PTP_PEROUT_DUTY_CYCLE or drop the duty cycle
handling?
[ ... ]
--
Sashiko AI review · https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/sashiko/#/patchset/20260908-ksz-perout-v3-0-6722a3f1ca75%40bootlin.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-10 10:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-08 7:27 [PATCH net-next v3 00/10] " Bastien Curutchet (Schneider Electric)
2026-09-08 7:27 ` [PATCH net-next v3 01/10] net: dsa: microchip: add the number of pins to chip infos Bastien Curutchet (Schneider Electric)
2026-09-10 10:30 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-08 7:27 ` [PATCH net-next v3 02/10] net: dsa: microchip: add the number of periodic signals " Bastien Curutchet (Schneider Electric)
2026-09-10 10:30 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-08 7:27 ` [PATCH net-next v3 03/10] net: dsa: microchip: use dynamic mask to check pulse width validity Bastien Curutchet (Schneider Electric)
2026-09-08 7:27 ` [PATCH net-next v3 04/10] net: dsa: microchip: extract PTP callbacks configuration from PTP registration Bastien Curutchet (Schneider Electric)
2026-09-08 7:27 ` [PATCH net-next v3 05/10] net: dsa: microchip: extract ptp_get_pin Bastien Curutchet (Schneider Electric)
2026-09-08 7:27 ` [PATCH net-next v3 06/10] net: dsa: microchip: extract compute_width Bastien Curutchet (Schneider Electric)
2026-09-10 10:30 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-08 7:27 ` [PATCH net-next v3 07/10] net: dsa: microchip: extract prepare reset Bastien Curutchet (Schneider Electric)
2026-09-10 10:30 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-08 7:27 ` [PATCH net-next v3 08/10] net: dsa: microchip: extract time update Bastien Curutchet (Schneider Electric)
2026-09-08 7:27 ` [PATCH net-next v3 09/10] net: dsa: microchip: extract time adjustment Bastien Curutchet (Schneider Electric)
2026-09-08 7:27 ` [PATCH net-next v3 10/10] net: dsa: microchip: add periodic output support for the KSZ8463 Bastien Curutchet (Schneider Electric)
2026-09-10 10:30 ` netdev-bot+sashiko [this message]
2026-09-11 7:23 ` Bastien Curutchet
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=178903621782.219967.1067616730052651942@kernel.org \
--to=netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org \
--cc=UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=bastien.curutchet@bootlin.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olteanv@gmail.com \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=pascal.eberhard@se.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
--cc=woojung.huh@microchip.com \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®