mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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®