> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-gfx <[email protected]> On Behalf Of
> Matthew Brost
> Sent: 26 November 2025 07:37
> To: Kumar G, Naresh <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] fixeup! drm/xe/xe_pagefault: Fix potential uninitialized
> fence usage in xe_pagefault_handle_vma
> 
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 03:48:42PM +0530, Nareshkumar Gollakoti wrote:
> > The variable "fence" should be initialized to NULL, and any usage of
> > fence should be guarded by a check to ensure it is not NULL
> >
> 
> I sent some replies to wrong list, see those but from Rodrigo:
> 
> 'fixup in the commit subject is absolutely no no! This is a git
> indication that the patch should be squashed to the one introducing the
> error, but we are in a non-rebasing branch. So you need to provide a fix
> as a new patch and using the proper tags indicating which patch it is
> fixing and Cc'ing author and reviewer of the original patch.'
> 
> You kinda ignored this feedback on the resend too...

Naresh, lets discuss this offline and regenerate patch. Rodrigo and Matt, 
Thanks for feedback.

Tejas
> 
> Matt
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Nareshkumar Gollakoti <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pagefault.c | 8 +++++---
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pagefault.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pagefault.c
> > index afb06598b6e1..401f1835939b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pagefault.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_pagefault.c
> > @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ static int xe_pagefault_handle_vma(struct xe_gt *gt,
> struct xe_vma *vma,
> >     struct xe_tile *tile = gt_to_tile(gt);
> >     struct xe_validation_ctx ctx;
> >     struct drm_exec exec;
> > -   struct dma_fence *fence;
> > +   struct dma_fence *fence = NULL;
> >     int err, needs_vram;
> >
> >     lockdep_assert_held_write(&vm->lock);
> > @@ -122,8 +122,10 @@ static int xe_pagefault_handle_vma(struct xe_gt
> *gt, struct xe_vma *vma,
> >             }
> >     }
> >
> > -   dma_fence_wait(fence, false);
> > -   dma_fence_put(fence);
> > +   if (fence) {
> > +           dma_fence_wait(fence, false);
> > +           dma_fence_put(fence);
> > +   }
> >
> >  unlock_dma_resv:
> >     xe_validation_ctx_fini(&ctx);
> > --
> > 2.43.0
> >

Reply via email to