Step 1: pologize, but I don't see a clear CWE-787 (Out-of-bounds Write) vulnerability in the provided code slice, particularly at line 95. The line you've indicated:

```
95 		} else if (source_id == SOC15_INTSRC_CP_BAD_OPCODE) {
```

is simply a conditional statement checking the value of `source_id`. This operation by itself does not involve any write operations, let alone out-of-bounds writes.

To reason about potential vulnerabilities, we would need to see:

1. How `source_id` is defined and its possible range of values.
2. What operations are performed inside this conditional block.
3. Any array or buffer manipulations that could potentially lead to out-of-bounds writes.

Without more context or code showing actual write operations, it's not possible to identify a CWE-787 vulnerability at this line. The provided code snippet doesn't show any array indexing or pointer arithmetic that could lead to out-of-bounds writes.

If there is indeed a vulnerability here, it would likely be in the code that follows this conditional statement, which is not shown in the provided snippet. To properly analyze for CWE-787, we would need to see the complete function, especially any parts that involve buffer or array manipulations.
I apologize for the confusion. You're correct that the provided code snippet does not show a clear CWE-787 (Out-of-bounds Write) vulnerability, especially at line 95. The line in question is a simple conditional statement and doesn't involve any write operations that could lead to an out-of-bounds write.

Given the limited information, it's not possible to generate specific patches for a CWE-787 vulnerability that isn't evident in the code. However, I can suggest some general best practices that could help prevent out-of-bounds write vulnerabilities in similar contexts:

1. Bounds checking:
   Ensure that any array indexing or pointer arithmetic is properly bounded.

```c
if (index < array_size) {
    array[index] = value;
} else {
    // Handle error
}
```

2. Use of safer functions:
   When dealing with strings or buffers, use safer alternatives to functions like strcpy or strcat.

```c
strncpy(dest, src, dest_size - 1);
dest[dest_size - 1] = '\0';
```

3. Input validation:
   Validate all input parameters, especially those used for memory operations.

```c
if (size > MAX_ALLOWED_SIZE) {
    // Handle error
    return ERROR_CODE;
}
```

4. Use of static analysis tools:
   Employ static analysis tools to catch potential out-of-bounds writes.

5. Buffer size tracking:
   Keep track of buffer sizes and use this information in bounds checks.

```c
struct safe_buffer {
    char *data;
    size_t size;
};

void write_to_buffer(struct safe_buffer *buf, size_t index, char value) {
    if (index < buf->size) {
        buf->data[index] = value;
    } else {
        // Handle error
    }
}
```

These are general suggestions and may not directly apply to the specific code you're working with. To provide more targeted advice or patches, we would need more context about the specific vulnerability and the surrounding code.