linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: X86-kernel <x86@kernel.org>,
	LKML Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	alison.schofield@intel.com, reinette.chatre@intel.com,
	Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4 4/6] x86/microcode/intel: Use a plain revision argument for print_ucode_rev()
Date: Mon,  9 Jan 2023 07:35:53 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230109153555.4986-5-ashok.raj@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230109153555.4986-1-ashok.raj@intel.com>

print_ucode_rev() takes a struct ucode_cpu_info argument. The sole purpose
of it is to print the microcode revision.

The only available ucode_cpu_info always describes the currently loaded
microcode revision. After a microcode update is successful, this is the new
revision, or on failure it is the original revision.

Subsequent changes need to print both the original and new revision, but
the original version will be cached in a plain integer, which makes the
code inconsistent.

Replace the struct ucode_cpu_info argument with a plain integer which
contains the revision number and adjust the call sites accordingly.

No functional change.

Signed-off-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: x86 <x86@kernel.org>
Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>
Cc: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
---
Changes since V1:

Thomas:
 - Updated commit log as suggested
 - Remove the line break after static void before print_ucode_info
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 31 ++++++++-------------------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
index 6bebc46ad8b1..1d709b72cfd0 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -310,13 +310,10 @@ static bool load_builtin_intel_microcode(struct cpio_data *cp)
 /*
  * Print ucode update info.
  */
-static void
-print_ucode_info(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, unsigned int date)
+static void print_ucode_info(unsigned int new_rev, unsigned int date)
 {
 	pr_info_once("microcode updated early to revision 0x%x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
-		     uci->cpu_sig.rev,
-		     date & 0xffff,
-		     date >> 24,
+		     new_rev, date & 0xffff, date >> 24,
 		     (date >> 16) & 0xff);
 }
 
@@ -334,7 +331,7 @@ void show_ucode_info_early(void)
 
 	if (delay_ucode_info) {
 		intel_cpu_collect_info(&uci);
-		print_ucode_info(&uci, current_mc_date);
+		print_ucode_info(uci.cpu_sig.rev. current_mc_date);
 		delay_ucode_info = 0;
 	}
 }
@@ -343,33 +340,23 @@ void show_ucode_info_early(void)
  * At this point, we can not call printk() yet. Delay printing microcode info in
  * show_ucode_info_early() until printk() works.
  */
-static void print_ucode(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
+static void print_ucode(int new_rev, int date)
 {
 	struct microcode_intel *mc;
 	int *delay_ucode_info_p;
 	int *current_mc_date_p;
 
-	mc = uci->mc;
-	if (!mc)
-		return;
-
 	delay_ucode_info_p = (int *)__pa_nodebug(&delay_ucode_info);
 	current_mc_date_p = (int *)__pa_nodebug(&current_mc_date);
 
 	*delay_ucode_info_p = 1;
-	*current_mc_date_p = mc->hdr.date;
+	*current_mc_date_p = date;
 }
 #else
 
-static inline void print_ucode(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
+static inline void print_ucode(int new_rev, int date)
 {
-	struct microcode_intel *mc;
-
-	mc = uci->mc;
-	if (!mc)
-		return;
-
-	print_ucode_info(uci, mc->hdr.date);
+	print_ucode_info(new_rev, date);
 }
 #endif
 
@@ -409,9 +396,9 @@ static int apply_microcode_early(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci, bool early)
 	uci->cpu_sig.rev = rev;
 
 	if (early)
-		print_ucode(uci);
+		print_ucode(uci->cpu_sig.rev, mc->hdr.date);
 	else
-		print_ucode_info(uci, mc->hdr.date);
+		print_ucode_info(uci->cpu_sig.rev, mc->hdr.date);
 
 	return 0;
 }
-- 
2.34.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-01-09 15:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-09 15:35 [PATCH v4 0/6] Some fixes and cleanups for microcode Ashok Raj
2023-01-09 15:35 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] x86/microcode: Add a parameter to microcode_check() to store CPU capabilities Ashok Raj
2023-01-21 14:54   ` [tip: x86/microcode] " tip-bot2 for Ashok Raj
2023-01-09 15:35 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] x86/microcode/core: Take a snapshot before and after applying microcode Ashok Raj
2023-01-21 14:54   ` [tip: x86/microcode] x86/microcode: Check CPU capabilities after late microcode update correctly tip-bot2 for Ashok Raj
2023-01-09 15:35 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] x86/microcode: Display revisions only when update is successful Ashok Raj
2023-01-09 15:35 ` Ashok Raj [this message]
2023-01-15 19:25   ` [PATCH v4 4/6] x86/microcode/intel: Use a plain revision argument for print_ucode_rev() Borislav Petkov
2023-01-15 19:39   ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-17 16:05     ` Ashok Raj
2023-01-17 18:16       ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-09 15:35 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] x86/microcode/intel: Print old and new rev during early boot Ashok Raj
2023-01-09 15:35 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] x86/microcode/intel: Print when early microcode loading fails Ashok Raj
2023-01-15 19:05   ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-17 16:12     ` Ashok Raj
2023-01-17 16:29       ` Dave Hansen
2023-01-17 18:21         ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-17 18:32           ` Dave Hansen
2023-01-17 18:40             ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-17 20:40               ` Ashok Raj
2023-01-17 20:58                 ` Luck, Tony
2023-01-19 17:59                   ` Ashok Raj
2023-01-20 12:03                     ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-20 16:52                       ` Ashok Raj
2023-01-17 21:00                 ` Dave Hansen
2023-01-17 21:06                 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-17 21:34                   ` Ashok Raj
2023-01-17 19:10             ` Ashok Raj
2023-01-17 16:35   ` Dave Hansen
2023-01-17 17:59     ` Ashok Raj

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20230109153555.4986-5-ashok.raj@intel.com \
    --to=ashok.raj@intel.com \
    --cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).