Re: [PATCH] fixeup! drm/xe/xe_pagefault: Fix potential uninitialized fence usage in xe_pagefault_handle_vma

["Kumar G, Naresh" <naresh.kumar.g@intel.com>]

Do Not Review, Ignore this patch.

On 26-11-2025 17:25, Yadav, Sanjay Kumar wrote:
> 
> On 25-11-2025 15:54, 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
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nareshkumar Gollakoti <naresh.kumar.g@intel.com>
> 
> LGTM
> 
> nits: Add a dot at the end of the commit description.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Sanjay Yadav <sanjay.kumar.yadav@intel.com>
> 
>> ---
>>   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);