From: netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org
To: s.shtylyov@auroraos.dev
Cc: andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com,
kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] ch9200: do return USB errors from control_write()
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 07:23:30 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <178954341078.22033.8722936070498955076@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260915185805.38712-1-s.shtylyov@auroraos.dev>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential
issue(s) to consider:
Critical: 0 · High: 1 · Medium: 0 · Low: 0
- [High] Incomplete fix: after removing `return 0;` from control_write()
(drivers/net/usb/ch9200.c:137-171), the helper now returns the…
--
ch9200: do return USB errors from control_write()
This removes the unconditional "return 0;" at the end of control_write()
in drivers/net/usb/ch9200.c so that the function falls through to
"return err;" instead. The stated intent is to propagate usb_control_msg()
errors to the callers.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/usb/ch9200.c b/drivers/net/usb/ch9200.c
> index a206ffa76f1b9..3a81e9e96fd33 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/usb/ch9200.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/usb/ch9200.c
> @@ -168,8 +168,6 @@ static int control_write(struct usbnet *dev, unsigned char request,
> err = -EINVAL;
> kfree(buf);
>
> - return 0;
> -
> err_out:
> return err;
> }
[Severity: High]
The commit message says this will "propagate USB errors to the callers",
but do any of the callers actually consume the value?
There are two in-tree callers. ch9200_mdio_write() is void and calls it
as a bare statement:
drivers/net/usb/ch9200.c:ch9200_mdio_write() {
...
control_write(dev, REQUEST_WRITE, 0, loc * 2, buff, 0x02,
CONTROL_TIMEOUT_MS);
}
ch9200_bind() stores the result six times and overwrites it every time,
with the last store clobbered by get_mac_address():
drivers/net/usb/ch9200.c:ch9200_bind() {
...
retval = control_write(dev, REQUEST_WRITE, 0, MAC_REG_THRESHOLD, data,
0x02, CONTROL_TIMEOUT_MS);
...
retval = control_write(dev, REQUEST_WRITE, 0, MAC_REG_CTRL, data, 0x02,
CONTROL_TIMEOUT_MS);
retval = get_mac_address(dev, addr);
eth_hw_addr_set(dev->net, addr);
return retval;
}
Since usbnet_probe() only aborts on a negative bind() status:
drivers/net/usb/usbnet.c:usbnet_probe() {
...
status = info->bind(dev, udev);
if (status < 0)
goto out1;
}
bind still reports success when every register write failed, for example
when a failed MAC_REG_THRESHOLD/MAC_REG_FIFO_DEPTH write is followed by a
successful MAC_REG_CTRL = 0x0D5F write that arms DMA/receiver/transmitter
with unprogrammed FIFO and flow-control watermarks, or when the
MAC_REG_CTRL write itself fails and the netdev is registered with the
datapath never enabled. Is the observable behaviour of the driver changed
at all by this patch?
There is a second point about the resulting contract. On success
usb_control_msg() returns the transferred length, so control_write() now
returns a positive value (2 for these register writes) rather than 0:
err = usb_control_msg(dev->udev, ...);
if (err >= 0 && err < size)
err = -EINVAL;
Would the obvious caller-side follow-up "if (retval) return retval;" then
treat every successful 2-byte register write as a failure? Would it be
better to normalize success to 0 in control_write(), or to check
"retval < 0" in each caller and update the callers in the same patch so
the errors being returned are actually acted upon?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/sashiko/#/patchset/20260915185805.38712-1-s.shtylyov%40auroraos.dev
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-16 7:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-15 18:58 Sergey Shtylyov
2026-09-15 21:53 ` Andrew Lunn
2026-09-16 7:23 ` netdev-bot+sashiko [this message]
2026-09-16 16:21 ` Sergey Shtylyov
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=178954341078.22033.8722936070498955076@kernel.org \
--to=netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=s.shtylyov@auroraos.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®