From: netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org
To: khendry@reliablecontrols.com
Cc: clement.leger@bootlin.com, andrew@lunn.ch, hkallweit1@gmail.com,
linux@armlinux.org.uk, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com,
kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com,
linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] net: pcs: rzn1-miic: Verify port number from dtb
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 11:43:14 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <178955899447.22033.5754427139793967412@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260914-rzn1-miic-fix-array-v4-2-069112feec86@reliablecontrols.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential
issue(s) to consider:
Critical: 0 · High: 1 (1) · Medium: 1 (1) · Low: 0
- [High] Incomplete fix — the new bounds check in miic_parse_dt()
(drivers/net/pcs/pcs-rzn1-miic.c:696-702) uses `port >…
- [Medium] The commit message ("Add check to make sure port number is in
range before writing to dt_val array") never states the pre-patch…
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] `renesas,miic-input` (`conf`) is stored into `dt_val[]` at
drivers/net/pcs/pcs-rzn1-miic.c:708 (and `renesas,miic-switch-portin`…
- [Medium] `miic_port_max` is documented as "Maximum MIIC supported"
(drivers/net/pcs/pcs-rzn1-miic.c:225) but is consumed with two…
--
net: pcs: rzn1-miic: Verify port number from dtb
This adds a range check on the converter child node "reg" value in
miic_parse_dt() before it is used as an index into the dt_val array, and
returns -EINVAL after releasing the node reference and freeing dt_val.
> net: pcs: rzn1-miic: Verify port number from dtb
>
> Add check to make sure port number is in range before writing
> to dt_val array
[Severity: Medium]
Could the changelog say what happens today without the check? In the
parent commit, miic_parse_dt() takes "reg" straight from the device tree
and uses it as an index:
drivers/net/pcs/pcs-rzn1-miic.c:miic_parse_dt() {
for_each_available_child_of_node(np, conv) {
if (of_property_read_u32(conv, "reg", &port))
continue;
...
dt_val[port + !miic->of_data->miic_port_start] = conf;
}
so an out-of-range reg is a slab out-of-bounds write during probe. Should
this carry a Fixes: tag pointing at the commit that introduced the
unvalidated indexing (7dc54d3b8d9100, later widened by f39e968dc168a7 /
61f1139a476569) so stable can pick it up? The preceding patch in this
series ("net: pcs: rzn1-miic: Fix config array initialization") does have
one.
It may also be worth mentioning the behaviour change: probe now fails and
the whole MII converter becomes unavailable for device trees that
previously probed with a bogus reg.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-rzn1-miic.c b/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-rzn1-miic.c
> index cb74861e823c8..1bd95ddf9400a 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-rzn1-miic.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/pcs/pcs-rzn1-miic.c
> @@ -693,6 +693,14 @@ static int miic_parse_dt(struct miic *miic, u32 *mode_cfg)
> if (of_property_read_u32(conv, "reg", &port))
> continue;
>
> + if (port < miic->of_data->miic_port_start ||
> + port > miic->of_data->miic_port_max) {
[Severity: High]
Is the upper bound off by one for the RZ/T2H variant? The comparison is
inclusive, but miic_port_max is used as a converter count elsewhere:
rzt2h_miic_of_data = {
.conf_conv_count = 5,
.miic_port_start = 0,
.miic_port_max = 4,
};
miic_init_hw() treats it as an exclusive count:
for (port = 0; port < miic->of_data->miic_port_max; port++)
So for compatible "renesas,r9a09g077-miic" a child with reg = <4> passes
the new test, and the store a few lines below becomes dt_val[5] on a
5-byte buffer:
dt_val = kmalloc_objs(*dt_val, miic->of_data->conf_conv_count);
...
/* Adjust for 0 based index */
dt_val[port + !miic->of_data->miic_port_start] = conf;
Does that still overflow dt_val[] by one byte with the DT-supplied
renesas,miic-input value? The binding's non-rzn1 branch restricts
converter reg to "enum: [0, 1, 2, 3]", and
include/dt-bindings/net/renesas,r9a09g077-pcs-miic.h documents only
Port 0..Port 3, so reg = <4> looks like exactly the malformed input this
patch is meant to reject.
Would an index-derived predicate work better, e.g.
if (port < miic->of_data->miic_port_start ||
port + !miic->of_data->miic_port_start >= miic->of_data->conf_conv_count)
RZ/N1 (miic_port_start = 1, miic_port_max = 5, conf_conv_count = 6) is
unaffected, which is probably why this is not visible on the common
platform.
There is a second effect of accepting port 4: miic_configure_phy_link()
does
mask = BIT(port + shift);
and with an ETHSW input (shift 0) port 4 sets BIT(4), which is in the
ESC/EtherCAT nibble [7:4] of MIIC_PHY_LINK that miic_probe() later
programs via miic_reg_rmw(miic, MIIC_PHY_LINK, ...). Can that clobber
EtherCAT port 0 link polarity?
[Severity: Medium]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but miic_port_max now has three
consumers with two conflicting meanings. The kernel-doc for struct
miic_of_data says "Maximum MIIC supported", miic_init_hw() uses it as an
exclusive count (port < miic_port_max), miic_create() uses it as an
inclusive maximum reg value:
if (port > of_data->miic_port_max || port < of_data->miic_port_start)
and this patch adds a third site with the inclusive reading. On
r9a09g077 the inclusive reading lets miic_create() hand out a PCS for
converter 4, which does not exist (rzt2h_index_to_string[] lists only
SWITCH_PORTIN and CONV0..CONV3), after which miic_config() /
miic_converter_enable() program MIIC_CONVCTRL(4) and MIIC_CONVRST bit 4.
Could the field be documented and used consistently, so that fixing one
site does not break the others?
> + dev_err(miic->dev, "Port number out of range: %d\n", port);
> + of_node_put(conv);
> + kfree(dt_val);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> if (of_property_read_u32(conv, "renesas,miic-input", &conf))
> continue;
>
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but since this block is now the validation
point for the child node, would it make sense to bound conf here too?
renesas,miic-input is stored without any range check against
conf_to_string_count, and with a silent u32 to s8 truncation:
if (of_property_read_u32(np, "renesas,miic-switch-portin", &conf) == 0)
dt_val[0] = conf;
...
dt_val[port + !miic->of_data->miic_port_start] = conf;
On a match failure, miic_match_dt_conf() -> miic_dump_conf() uses the
stored value as an index and then prints the result:
if (conf[i] != MIIC_MODCTRL_CONF_NONE)
conf_name = of_data->conf_to_string[conf[i]];
...
dev_err(miic->dev, "%s: %s\n", of_data->index_to_string[i], conf_name);
With renesas,miic-input = <100> nothing in modctrl_match_table[] matches,
so miic_dump_conf() reads past the 14-entry conf_to_string[] (9-entry
rzt2h_conf_to_string[]) and hands the resulting word to %s. Can that
oops or leak kernel memory into dmesg?
Also, conf = 255 truncates to -1, which equals MIIC_MODCTRL_CONF_NONE, so
miic_modctrl_match() treats the entry as a wildcard instead of rejecting
it. Is that intended?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/sashiko/#/patchset/20260914-rzn1-miic-fix-array-v4-0-069112feec86%40reliablecontrols.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-16 11:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-14 16:40 [PATCH v4 0/2] net: pcs: rzn1-miic: Fix config array initialization Kyle Hendry via B4 Relay
2026-09-14 16:41 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] " Kyle Hendry via B4 Relay
2026-09-14 16:57 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2026-09-14 17:13 ` Andrew Lunn
2026-09-14 17:14 ` Andrew Lunn
2026-09-16 11:43 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-14 16:41 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] net: pcs: rzn1-miic: Verify port number from dtb Kyle Hendry via B4 Relay
2026-09-14 17:15 ` Andrew Lunn
2026-09-16 11:43 ` netdev-bot+sashiko [this message]
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=178955899447.22033.5754427139793967412@kernel.org \
--to=netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=clement.leger@bootlin.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=khendry@reliablecontrols.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.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®