On Fri, 2026-09-11 at 22:36 +0000, [email protected] wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential
> issue(s) to consider:
> - [High] Negative error codes from `nvif_device_gcx_ready()` are
> treated as bitmasks, leading to unpredictable runtime suspend
> behavior.

Probably right

> - [High] Hardcoding `r535_gsp_gcx_ready(gsp)` bypasses the GSP
> function vtable and will cause a NULL pointer dereference on non-RM
> GSPs.

Completely wrong.

> - [Medium] `nvkm_udevice_gcx_ready()` bypasses the ioctl unpack
> protocol and returns a positive bitmask directly as a return code.

I think fine? But unsure if I actually agree with this, if anyone has
any thoughts on this let me know

> - [Low] `GSP_GCX_ENTRY_GC6_READY` and `GSP_GCX_ENTRY_GCOFF_READY` are
> defined but never used.

Correct

Reply via email to