Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] drm/xe/drm_ras: Wire up error threshold callbacks

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The set_error_threshold callback implementation does not perform bounds checking on the threshold value.
--

commit fed54e8b69e86b28d2dcdaf8a7fe08701b357d95
Author: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>

drm/xe/drm_ras: Wire up error threshold callbacks

This commit wires up the get and set error threshold callbacks to the
drm_ras infrastructure, allowing userspace to configure these thresholds
via netlink commands.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_drm_ras.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_drm_ras.c
> index 7937d8ba0ed9c..4afa2ad98300f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_drm_ras.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_drm_ras.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -86,6 +86,38 @@ static int clear_correctable_error_counter(struct drm_ras_node *node, u32 error_

[ ... ]

> +static int set_correctable_error_threshold(struct drm_ras_node *ep, u32 error_id, u32 threshold)
> +{
> +	struct xe_device *xe = ep->priv;
> +	struct xe_drm_ras *ras = &xe->ras;
> +	struct xe_drm_ras_counter *info = ras->info[DRM_XE_RAS_ERR_SEV_CORRECTABLE];
> +
> +	if (!info || !info[error_id].name)
> +		return -ENOENT;
> +
> +	if (!xe->info.has_sysctrl)
> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +

[Severity: Medium]
Does this code need bounds checking for the threshold value before passing it
to the hardware?

The drm_ras API documentation for set_error_threshold specifies that the
driver is responsible for error threshold bounds checking. If a privileged
user provides an extreme value, such as 0, could this result in undefined
hardware behavior or continuous interrupts from the system controller?

> +	return xe_ras_set_threshold(xe, DRM_XE_RAS_ERR_SEV_CORRECTABLE, error_id, threshold);
> +}

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260623101043.255897-1-raag.jadav@intel.com?part=4