Re: [PATCH v2 03/13] drm/xe/pf: Force new VFs prorities only once

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] Incorrect `num_vfs` argument passed to `pf_config_bulk_set_u32_done()` causes an out-of-bounds log message for VF bounds.
--

--- Patch [3]: [PATCH v2 03/13] drm/xe/pf: Force new VFs prorities only once ---
commit d9a195ee96c85a89ef1ab7a22febed668f958fe6
Author: Michal Wajdeczko <[email protected]>
Subject: drm/xe/pf: Force new VFs prorities only once

This commit defers forcing VF scheduling priority changes until after the
initial change of the SCHED_IF_IDLE policy, preventing overwrites of
individual per-VF priorities. It also moves the priority change code to the
_config component for proper isolation.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_pf_config.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_pf_config.c
> index 658e9b048751d..c74745642a925 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_pf_config.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt_sriov_pf_config.c

[ ... ]

> +void xe_gt_sriov_pf_config_force_sched_priority_locked(struct xe_gt *gt, u32 priority)
> +{
> +	unsigned int total_vfs = 1 + xe_gt_sriov_pf_get_totalvfs(gt);
> +	struct xe_gt_sriov_config *config;
> +	unsigned int n;
> +
> +	xe_gt_assert(gt, IS_SRIOV_PF(gt_to_xe(gt)));
> +	lockdep_assert_held(xe_gt_sriov_pf_master_mutex(gt));
> +
> +	for (n = 0; n < total_vfs; n++) {
> +		config = pf_pick_vf_config(gt, VFID(n));
> +		config->sched_priority = priority;
> +	}
> +
> +	pf_config_bulk_set_u32_done(gt, PFID, 1 + total_vfs, priority,

[Severity: Low]
Does this pass an incorrect bound for the log message?

The variable total_vfs is already initialized as
1 + xe_gt_sriov_pf_get_totalvfs(gt). Adding 1 again here makes the passed
value 2 + xe_gt_sriov_pf_get_totalvfs(gt), which results in an out-of-bounds
log message indicating settings were applied to an incorrect range of VFs.

> +				    pf_get_sched_priority, "scheduling priority",
> +				    sched_priority_unit, n, 0);
> +}
> +

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=3