From: netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org
To: maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, andrew@lunn.ch, kuba@kernel.org,
edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk,
hkallweit1@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com,
christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu, herve.codina@bootlin.com,
f.fainelli@gmail.com, vladimir.oltean@nxp.com,
kory.maincent@bootlin.com, kabel@kernel.org,
o.rempel@pengutronix.de, nicveronese@gmail.com, horms@kernel.org,
mwojtas@chromium.org, romain.gantois@bootlin.com,
daniel@makrotopia.org, dimitri.fedrau@liebherr.com,
frank.wunderlich@linux.dev, p.ameruoso@live.it
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND net-next v17 06/10] net: phy: phy_port: Store information about a port's upstream
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 18:52:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <178915272783.219967.7690619054974247239@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260910170103.1029108-7-maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential
issue(s) to consider:
Critical: 0 · High: 0 · Medium: 0 (1) · Low: 3
- [Low] The commit message states the change keeps track of "the port id
of the MII port backing it", but phy_set_upstream_port()…
- [Low] The kernel-doc of the newly exported phy_set_upstream_port()
(drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c:3786-3791) documents only that it "Sets…
- [Low] Claimed missing error-path rollback: both new connect_phy
implementations (phy_sfp_connect_phy() at…
Pre-existing issues:
- [Medium] phy_set_upstream_port()
(drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c:3792-3803) traverses phydev->ports with…
--
net: phy: phy_port: Store information about a port's upstream
This adds an upstream_port pointer to struct phy_port and struct phy_device,
along with a new exported helper phy_set_upstream_port(), so that an MDI port
backed by an MII port (for example an SFP module port backed by the SFP cage
port) records the port feeding it. The SFP connect/disconnect callbacks in
both phy_device.c and phylink.c are updated to set and clear it.
A few questions below.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
> index 26634ef274f33..561d19edf331c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c
> @@ -1493,6 +1493,7 @@ static int phy_sfp_connect_phy(void *upstream, struct phy_device *phy)
> int ret;
>
> phydev->has_sfp_mod_phy = true;
> + phy_set_upstream_port(phy, phydev->sfp_cage_port);
>
> /* If we aren't attached to a netdev, we can't add the SFP PHY to its
> * topology.
[Severity: Low]
Here and in phylink_sfp_connect_phy(), the cage port pointer is published
into the module PHY before a fallible step (phy_link_topo_add_phy() here,
phylink_sfp_config_phy() there) and is not cleared if that step fails.
sfp_register_bus() also returns a connect_phy() error without calling
disconnect_phy().
Is a rollback needed on those paths, or is it intentionally left out?
Tracing it through suggests no dangling pointer is reachable today:
sfp_sm_probe_phy()
err = sfp_add_phy(sfp->sfp_bus, phy);
if (err) {
phy_device_remove(phy);
phy_device_free(phy);
so the module phy_device and its ports are destroyed on that failure, and
the cage port is still alive at that point. The two paths that free the
cage port (phy_sfp_probe() out_port below, and phylink_register_sfp() ->
phylink_destroy_sfp_cage_port()) only run when sfp_register_bus() fails,
which requires bus->phydev to be non-NULL:
sfp_register_bus()
if (ops->connect_phy && bus->phydev) {
ret = ops->connect_phy(bus->upstream, bus->phydev);
and the state machine detaches the module PHY (sfp_sm_phy_detach() ->
sfp_remove_phy(), which clears bus->phydev and invokes disconnect_phy())
before any upstream can register again. Would it still be worth making
the failure path symmetric so this does not depend on that ordering?
> @@ -1526,6 +1527,8 @@ static void phy_sfp_disconnect_phy(void *upstream, struct phy_device *phy)
>
> if (dev)
> phy_link_topo_del_phy(dev, phy);
> +
> + phy_set_upstream_port(phy, NULL);
> }
>
> /**
[ ... ]
> @@ -1816,6 +1821,8 @@ static int phy_sfp_probe(struct phy_device *phydev)
> }
> }
>
> + phydev->sfp_cage_port = port;
> +
> ret = sfp_bus_add_upstream(bus, phydev, &sfp_phydev_ops);
> if (ret)
> goto out_port;
> @@ -1825,14 +1832,13 @@ static int phy_sfp_probe(struct phy_device *phydev)
> */
> sfp_bus_put(bus);
>
> - phydev->sfp_cage_port = port;
> -
> return ret;
>
> out_port:
> if (port) {
> phy_del_port(phydev, port);
> phy_port_destroy(port);
> + phydev->sfp_cage_port = NULL;
> }
> out_sfp:
> sfp_bus_put(bus);
[ ... ]
> @@ -3777,6 +3783,25 @@ struct phy_port *phy_get_sfp_port(struct phy_device *phydev)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(phy_get_sfp_port);
>
> +/**
> + * phy_set_upstream_port() - Sets the phy_port controlling the MII this PHY is
> + * attached to.
> + * @phydev: pointer to the PHY device we set the upstream of.
> + * @port: The phy_port upstream of this PHY, can be NULL.
> + */
> +void phy_set_upstream_port(struct phy_device *phydev, struct phy_port *port)
> +{
> + struct phy_port *local_port;
> +
> + ASSERT_RTNL();
[Severity: Low]
The kernel-doc for phy_set_upstream_port() describes only that it sets the
phy_port controlling the MII, but the body does two more things that callers
need to know about: it hard-asserts RTNL, and it overwrites upstream_port on
every entry of phydev->ports.
Since this is EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() and the prototype in include/linux/phy.h
carries no locking annotation either, a caller following only the documented
contract will trip the WARN_ONCE() in ASSERT_RTNL(). Could the kernel-doc
state that RTNL must be held and that the value is propagated to all of the
PHY's ports?
> +
> + phydev->upstream_port = port;
> +
> + phy_for_each_port(phydev, local_port)
> + local_port->upstream_port = port;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(phy_set_upstream_port);
[Severity: Medium]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but the phy_for_each_port()
traversal here relies solely on ASSERT_RTNL(), while the list entries are
unlinked and freed from the driver-core unbind path, which does not take
RTNL:
phy_remove()
phy_sfp_release() / phy_cleanup_ports()
list_for_each_entry_safe(port, tmp, &phydev->ports, head) {
phy_del_port(phydev, port);
phy_port_destroy(port);
}
phy_get_sfp_port() and phy_link_topo_del_phy() already walk the same list
under the same RTNL-only convention, so the pattern predates this change,
and all in-tree callers of the new helper run from the SFP state machine
with RTNL held (sfp.c takes rtnl_lock() around sfp_sm_event()). The only
concurrent mutator found is a root-initiated sysfs unbind of the module PHY
driver.
Would it make sense to either take phydev->lock around the traversal, or
write down the rule that phydev->ports is immutable while the PHY is
registered?
Also, phy_add_sfp_mod_port() and phylink_add_sfp_mod_port() assign
port->upstream_port directly, and this helper later rewrites every port of
the PHY. Which of the two is meant to be authoritative?
>
> /**
> * fwnode_mdio_find_device - Given a fwnode, find the mdio_device
> * @fwnode: pointer to the mdio_device's fwnode
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phylink.c b/drivers/net/phy/phylink.c
> index c8f57d78f96eb..320c8c2dd206a 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/phy/phylink.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phylink.c
> @@ -4132,6 +4134,8 @@ static int phylink_sfp_connect_phy(void *upstream, struct phy_device *phy)
> phy_interface_and(phy->host_interfaces, phylink_sfp_interfaces,
> pl->config->supported_interfaces);
>
> + phy_set_upstream_port(phy, pl->sfp_cage_port);
> +
> /* Do the initial configuration */
> return phylink_sfp_config_phy(pl, phy);
> }
> @@ -4140,6 +4144,7 @@ static void phylink_sfp_disconnect_phy(void *upstream,
> struct phy_device *phydev)
> {
> phylink_disconnect_phy(upstream);
> + phy_set_upstream_port(phydev, NULL);
> }
>
> static const struct sfp_upstream_ops sfp_phylink_ops = {
> diff --git a/include/linux/phy.h b/include/linux/phy.h
> index cb579b8a5b5f7..335821eb22171 100644
> --- a/include/linux/phy.h
> +++ b/include/linux/phy.h
> @@ -615,6 +615,7 @@ struct phy_oatc14_sqi_capability {
> * @sfp_bus: SFP bus attached to this PHY's fiber port
> * @sfp_cage_port: The phy_port connected to the downstream SFP cage
> * @mod_port: phy_port representing the SFP module, if it is phy-less
> + * @upstream_port: phy_port this PHY's MII attaches to, if any
> * @attached_dev: The attached enet driver's device instance ptr
> * @adjust_link: Callback for the enet controller to respond to changes: in the
> * link state.
> @@ -809,6 +810,7 @@ struct phy_device {
> struct sfp_bus *sfp_bus;
> struct phy_port *sfp_cage_port;
> struct phy_port *mod_port;
> + struct phy_port *upstream_port;
[Severity: Low]
Is this new phy_device member read anywhere? phy_set_upstream_port() assigns
it, but grepping for upstream_port through the end of the series shows the
only reader is in net/ethtool/port.c:
reply->upstream_port = port->upstream_port ? port->upstream_port->id : 0;
which uses the phy_port field, not the phy_device one. Could
phy_device::upstream_port be dropped, or is there a planned consumer?
Related to that, the commit message says:
"let's keep track of the port id of the MII port backing it"
but what is stored is a raw struct phy_port pointer, not an id, and the new
phy_device field is not mentioned at all. Could the wording be adjusted to
match what the code stores?
> struct phylink *phylink;
> struct net_device *attached_dev;
> struct mii_timestamper *mii_ts;
> @@ -2493,6 +2495,8 @@ int __phy_hwtstamp_set(struct phy_device *phydev,
>
> struct phy_port *phy_get_sfp_port(struct phy_device *phydev);
>
> +void phy_set_upstream_port(struct phy_device *phydev, struct phy_port *port);
> +
> /**
> * phy_module_driver() - Helper macro for registering PHY drivers
> * @__phy_drivers: array of PHY drivers to register
[ ... ]
--
Sashiko AI review · https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/sashiko/#/patchset/20260910170103.1029108-1-maxime.chevallier%40bootlin.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-11 18:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-10 17:00 [PATCH RESEND net-next v17 00/10] net: phy_port: SFP modules representation and phy_port listing Maxime Chevallier
2026-09-10 17:00 ` [PATCH RESEND net-next v17 01/10] net: phy: phy_link_topology: Add a helper for opportunistic alloc Maxime Chevallier
2026-09-11 18:51 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-10 17:00 ` [PATCH RESEND net-next v17 02/10] net: phy: phy_link_topology: Track ports in phy_link_topology Maxime Chevallier
2026-09-11 18:52 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-10 17:00 ` [PATCH RESEND net-next v17 03/10] net: phylink: Register a phy_port for MAC-driven SFP cages Maxime Chevallier
2026-09-11 18:52 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-10 17:00 ` [PATCH RESEND net-next v17 04/10] net: phy: Create SFP phy_port before registering upstream Maxime Chevallier
2026-09-10 17:00 ` [PATCH RESEND net-next v17 05/10] net: phy: Represent PHY-less SFP modules with phy_port Maxime Chevallier
2026-09-11 18:52 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-10 17:00 ` [PATCH RESEND net-next v17 06/10] net: phy: phy_port: Store information about a port's upstream Maxime Chevallier
2026-09-11 18:52 ` netdev-bot+sashiko [this message]
2026-09-10 17:00 ` [PATCH RESEND net-next v17 07/10] net: phy: phy_link_topology: Add a helper to retrieve ports Maxime Chevallier
2026-09-11 18:52 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-10 17:01 ` [PATCH RESEND net-next v17 08/10] netlink: specs: Add ethernet port listing with ethtool Maxime Chevallier
2026-09-11 18:52 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-10 17:01 ` [PATCH RESEND net-next v17 09/10] net: ethtool: Introduce ethtool command to list ports Maxime Chevallier
2026-09-11 18:52 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-10 17:01 ` [PATCH RESEND net-next v17 10/10] Documentation: networking: Update the phy_port infrastructure description Maxime Chevallier
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=178915272783.219967.7690619054974247239@kernel.org \
--to=netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=daniel@makrotopia.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dimitri.fedrau@liebherr.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=frank.wunderlich@linux.dev \
--cc=herve.codina@bootlin.com \
--cc=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=kabel@kernel.org \
--cc=kory.maincent@bootlin.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com \
--cc=mwojtas@chromium.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicveronese@gmail.com \
--cc=o.rempel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=p.ameruoso@live.it \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=romain.gantois@bootlin.com \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
--cc=vladimir.oltean@nxp.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®