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.
Based on the provided code slice and the identified CWE-787 (Out-of-bounds Write) vulnerability at line 95, here are five possible patches:

Patch 1: Add a bounds check for source_id
```c
95 		} else if (source_id == SOC15_INTSRC_CP_BAD_OPCODE && source_id < MAX_SOURCE_ID) {
```

Patch 2: Use a switch statement with a default case
```c
switch (source_id) {
    case SOC15_INTSRC_CP_END_OF_PIPE:
        // Handle this case
        break;
    case SOC15_INTSRC_SQ_INTERRUPT_MSG:
        // Handle this case
        break;
    case SOC15_INTSRC_CP_BAD_OPCODE:
        // Handle this case
        break;
    default:
        // Handle unexpected source_id
        break;
}
```

Patch 3: Validate source_id before processing
```c
if (is_valid_source_id(source_id)) {
    if (source_id == SOC15_INTSRC_CP_END_OF_PIPE) {
        // ...
    } else if (source_id == SOC15_INTSRC_SQ_INTERRUPT_MSG) {
        // ...
    } else if (source_id == SOC15_INTSRC_CP_BAD_OPCODE) {
        // ...
    }
} else {
    // Handle invalid source_id
}
```

Patch 4: Use a lookup table for valid source_ids
```c
static const bool valid_source_ids[MAX_SOURCE_ID] = {
    [SOC15_INTSRC_CP_END_OF_PIPE] = true,
    [SOC15_INTSRC_SQ_INTERRUPT_MSG] = true,
    [SOC15_INTSRC_CP_BAD_OPCODE] = true,
};

if (source_id < MAX_SOURCE_ID && valid_source_ids[source_id]) {
    // Process the source_id
} else {
    // Handle invalid source_id
}
```

Patch 5: Use bitwise operations to validate source_id
```c
#define VALID_SOURCE_IDS ((1 << SOC15_INTSRC_CP_END_OF_PIPE) | \
                          (1 << SOC15_INTSRC_SQ_INTERRUPT_MSG) | \
                          (1 << SOC15_INTSRC_CP_BAD_OPCODE))

if (source_id < 32 && (VALID_SOURCE_IDS & (1 << source_id))) {
    // Process the source_id
} else {
    // Handle invalid source_id
}
```