[PATCH net] net: stmmac: unwind the WoL IRQ after a safety IRQ request failure

[PATCH net] net: stmmac: unwind the WoL IRQ after a safety IRQ request failure

[James Hilliard]

The safety IRQ is requested after the MAC and optional WoL IRQs. If its
request fails, stmmac_free_irq() frees the unregistered safety IRQ and
leaks the WoL handler. This can warn about an already-free IRQ and make
the next open fail.

Move the safety and WoL cleanup labels into reverse acquisition order.
This also fixes unwind after later per-queue IRQ request failures.

Fixes: 5c2215167d12 ("net: stmmac: Add driver support for common safety IRQ")
Signed-off-by: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
index 3f34d491c959..4f3d452c3503 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
@@ -3797,13 +3797,13 @@ static void stmmac_free_irq(struct net_device *dev,
 			free_irq(msi->sfty_ce_irq, dev);
 		fallthrough;
 	case REQ_IRQ_ERR_SFTY_CE:
-		if (priv->wol_irq > 0 && priv->wol_irq != dev->irq)
-			free_irq(priv->wol_irq, dev);
-		fallthrough;
-	case REQ_IRQ_ERR_SFTY:
 		if (priv->sfty_irq > 0 && priv->sfty_irq != dev->irq)
 			free_irq(priv->sfty_irq, dev);
 		fallthrough;
+	case REQ_IRQ_ERR_SFTY:
+		if (priv->wol_irq > 0 && priv->wol_irq != dev->irq)
+			free_irq(priv->wol_irq, dev);
+		fallthrough;
 	case REQ_IRQ_ERR_WOL:
 		free_irq(dev->irq, dev);
 		fallthrough;

---
base-commit: a7bfaba4823e3c165bb2004c74eff7c096672bc7
change-id: 20260930-stmmac-irq-unwind-0be86901638d

Best regards,
--  
James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>

Re: [PATCH net] net: stmmac: unwind the WoL IRQ after a safety IRQ request failure

[netdev-bot+sinfo]

Hi!

This is an automated message. This series looks like a fix, but its
commit messages seem to be missing some information:

 - How the issue was discovered, e.g. hit in production, hit during
   development, syzbot report, manual code inspection, LLM or static
   analysis tool scan.

 - Whether the issue was actually triggered, or is only theoretical
   (e.g. found by code inspection). If it was triggered please include
   the symptoms, like the stack trace or error messages.

 - What hardware the change was tested on. For driver fixes please
   mention the device (and if relevant firmware version) used for
   testing, or say that the change was not tested on real hardware.

Please do not repost the series just to address the above. Instead,
reply to this email with the missing information, so that reviewers
can take it into account. If the series needs another revision for
other reasons, please include the information in the commit messages
then.

The evaluation is done by an LLM so it may be wrong, if you think
that is the case please reply and explain.