[PATCH v4 2/2] phy: mediatek: Add support for PCI-Express Gen4 S-PHY

[sashiko-bot at kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] phy: mediatek: endianness bug when reading split NVMEM cells in mtk_pcie_sphy_get_one_cal_para()
--

commit ab276d5dc9414b3b5618ea96c84dcc086bdf9036
Author: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno at collabora.com>

phy: mediatek: Add support for PCI-Express Gen4 S-PHY

This commit introduces the driver for the PCI-Express Gen4 S-PHY found in
recent MediaTek SoCs such as MT6991 and MT8196. It implements the PHY
initialization routines and handles reading eFuse calibration data from
the NVMEM framework.

> diff --git a/drivers/phy/mediatek/phy-mtk-pcie-sphy.c b/drivers/phy/mediatek/phy-mtk-pcie-sphy.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..2bf10346ea97a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/phy/mediatek/phy-mtk-pcie-sphy.c
[ ... ]
> +static int mtk_pcie_sphy_get_one_cal_para(struct device *dev, const char *name, u8 max_val)
> +{
> +	u16 buf;
> +	u8 tmp;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * All of the calibrations are always max 8 bits long, but some may
> +	 * be split between two different 8-bits cells: handle this corner
> +	 * case by retrying reading as u16.
> +	 */
> +	ret = nvmem_cell_read_u8(dev, name, &tmp);
> +	if (ret == 0)
> +		buf = tmp;
> +	else
> +		ret = nvmem_cell_read_u16(dev, name, &buf);

[Severity: Medium]
When an 8-bit (or smaller) NVMEM cell crosses a byte boundary in hardware,
the NVMEM core evaluates its length as 2 bytes, causing nvmem_cell_read_u8()
to fail with -EINVAL.

Does falling back to nvmem_cell_read_u16() cause an endianness issue here?

Because the NVMEM core populates the buffer with a direct memory copy, the
shifted valid data is placed in the first byte and zeroes in the second byte.
On big-endian architectures, interpreting this buffer directly as a native
u16 variable evaluates to buf[0] << 8, which effectively multiplies the
calibration value by 256. This could lead to spurious -ERANGE failures or
incorrect calibration values being written to the PHY.

Would it be safer to use nvmem_cell_read_variable_le_u32() to handle these
split cells robustly across different architectures?

> +
> +	if (ret == -ENOENT) {
> +		dev_info(dev, "No calibration for %s. Using defaults\n", name);
> +		return -ENOENT;
> +	} else if (ret)
> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, ret,
> +				     "Cannot get calibration data for %s\n", name);
> +
> +	if (buf > max_val)
> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, -ERANGE,
> +				     "Bad value %u retrieved for %s.\n", buf, name);
> +
> +	return buf;
> +}
[ ... ]

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260915101022.23852-1-angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com?part=2