[Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/4] x86/ucode: Cleanup - Part 2/n

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/4] x86/ucode: Cleanup - Part 2/n

[Andrew Cooper]

Two minor bugfixes, and two minor cleanups with minor benefits to other code
as well.

There is no dependency on the remaining pieces of the Part 1 series.

Andrew Cooper (4):
  x86/ucode/amd: Fix assertion in compare_patch()
  x86/ucode: Fix error paths in apply_microcode()
  xen: Drop raw_smp_processor_id()
  xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper

 xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c   | 27 +++++++++++----------------
 xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 29 +++++++++++++----------------
 xen/include/asm-arm/smp.h          |  2 +-
 xen/include/asm-x86/smp.h          |  2 +-
 xen/include/xen/smp.h              |  2 --
 xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h          | 11 +++++++++++
 6 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)

-- 
2.11.0


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/4] x86/ucode/amd: Fix assertion in compare_patch()

[Andrew Cooper]

This is clearly a typo.

Fixes: 9da23943ccd "microcode: introduce a global cache of ucode patch"
Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
---
CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
CC: Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>
CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
---
 xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
index 99e2449eee..d4b2874de6 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -222,7 +222,7 @@ static enum microcode_match_result compare_patch(
 
     /* Both patches to compare are supposed to be applicable to local CPU. */
     ASSERT(microcode_fits(new->mc_amd) != MIS_UCODE);
-    ASSERT(microcode_fits(new->mc_amd) != MIS_UCODE);
+    ASSERT(microcode_fits(old->mc_amd) != MIS_UCODE);
 
     return compare_header(new_header, old_header);
 }
-- 
2.11.0


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/4] x86/ucode: Fix error paths in apply_microcode()

[Andrew Cooper]

In the unlikley case that patch application completes, but the resutling
revision isn't expected, sig->rev doesn't get updated to match reality.

It will get adjusted the next time collect_cpu_info() gets called, but in the
meantime Xen might operate on a state value.  Nothing good will come of this.

Rewrite the logic to always update the stashed revision, before worring about
whether the attempt was a success or failure.

Take the opportunity to make the printk() messages as consistent as possible.

Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
---
-CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
CC: Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>
CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
---
 xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c   | 14 +++++++-------
 xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 22 +++++++++++-----------
 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
index d4b2874de6..a053e43923 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -229,11 +229,11 @@ static enum microcode_match_result compare_patch(
 
 static int apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch)
 {
-    uint32_t rev;
     int hw_err;
     unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
     struct cpu_signature *sig = &per_cpu(cpu_sig, cpu);
     const struct microcode_header_amd *hdr;
+    uint32_t rev, old_rev = sig->rev;
 
     if ( !patch )
         return -ENOENT;
@@ -249,6 +249,7 @@ static int apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch)
 
     /* get patch id after patching */
     rdmsrl(MSR_AMD_PATCHLEVEL, rev);
+    sig->rev = rev;
 
     /*
      * Some processors leave the ucode blob mapping as UC after the update.
@@ -259,15 +260,14 @@ static int apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch)
     /* check current patch id and patch's id for match */
     if ( hw_err || (rev != hdr->patch_id) )
     {
-        printk(KERN_ERR "microcode: CPU%d update from revision "
-               "%#x to %#x failed\n", cpu, rev, hdr->patch_id);
+        printk(XENLOG_ERR
+               "microcode: CPU%u update rev %#x to %#x failed, result %#x\n",
+               cpu, old_rev, hdr->patch_id, rev);
         return -EIO;
     }
 
-    printk(KERN_WARNING "microcode: CPU%d updated from revision %#x to %#x\n",
-           cpu, sig->rev, hdr->patch_id);
-
-    sig->rev = rev;
+    printk(XENLOG_WARNING "microcode: CPU%u updated from revision %#x to %#x\n",
+           cpu, old_rev, hdr->patch_id);
 
     return 0;
 }
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
index 5e9c2a9c7f..6ac5f98694 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -278,10 +278,10 @@ static enum microcode_match_result compare_patch(
 static int apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch)
 {
     uint64_t msr_content;
-    unsigned int val[2];
-    unsigned int cpu_num = raw_smp_processor_id();
+    unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
     struct cpu_signature *sig = &this_cpu(cpu_sig);
     const struct microcode_intel *mc_intel;
+    uint32_t rev, old_rev = sig->rev;
 
     if ( !patch )
         return -ENOENT;
@@ -302,20 +302,20 @@ static int apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch)
 
     /* get the current revision from MSR 0x8B */
     rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_UCODE_REV, msr_content);
-    val[1] = (uint32_t)(msr_content >> 32);
+    sig->rev = rev = msr_content >> 32;
 
-    if ( val[1] != mc_intel->hdr.rev )
+    if ( rev != mc_intel->hdr.rev )
     {
-        printk(KERN_ERR "microcode: CPU%d update from revision "
-               "%#x to %#x failed. Resulting revision is %#x.\n", cpu_num,
-               sig->rev, mc_intel->hdr.rev, val[1]);
+        printk(XENLOG_ERR
+               "microcode: CPU%u update rev %#x to %#x failed, result %#x\n",
+               cpu, old_rev, mc_intel->hdr.rev, rev);
         return -EIO;
     }
-    printk(KERN_INFO "microcode: CPU%d updated from revision "
-           "%#x to %#x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
-           cpu_num, sig->rev, val[1], mc_intel->hdr.year,
+
+    printk(XENLOG_WARNING
+           "microcode: CPU%u updated from revision %#x to %#x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
+           cpu, old_rev, rev, mc_intel->hdr.year,
            mc_intel->hdr.month, mc_intel->hdr.day);
-    sig->rev = val[1];
 
     return 0;
 }
-- 
2.11.0


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] xen: Drop raw_smp_processor_id()

[Andrew Cooper]

There is only a single user of raw_smp_processor_id() left in the tree (and it
is unconditionally compiled out).  Drop the alias from all architectures.

Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
---
CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
CC: Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>
CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
CC: Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>
CC: Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@epam.com>
---
 xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 2 +-
 xen/include/asm-arm/smp.h        | 2 +-
 xen/include/asm-x86/smp.h        | 2 +-
 xen/include/xen/smp.h            | 2 --
 4 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
index a053e43923..0998a36b5c 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ static int get_ucode_from_buffer_amd(
     memcpy(mc_amd->mpb, mpbuf->data, mpbuf->len);
 
     pr_debug("microcode: CPU%d size %zu, block size %u offset %zu equivID %#x rev %#x\n",
-             raw_smp_processor_id(), bufsize, mpbuf->len, *offset,
+             smp_processor_id(), bufsize, mpbuf->len, *offset,
              ((struct microcode_header_amd *)mc_amd->mpb)->processor_rev_id,
              ((struct microcode_header_amd *)mc_amd->mpb)->patch_id);
 
diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/smp.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/smp.h
index fdbcefa241..af5a2fe652 100644
--- a/xen/include/asm-arm/smp.h
+++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/smp.h
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ DECLARE_PER_CPU(cpumask_var_t, cpu_core_mask);
 
 #define cpu_is_offline(cpu) unlikely(!cpu_online(cpu))
 
-#define raw_smp_processor_id() (get_processor_id())
+#define smp_processor_id() get_processor_id()
 
 /*
  * Do we, for platform reasons, need to actually keep CPUs online when we
diff --git a/xen/include/asm-x86/smp.h b/xen/include/asm-x86/smp.h
index 6150363655..f7485f602e 100644
--- a/xen/include/asm-x86/smp.h
+++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/smp.h
@@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ int cpu_add(uint32_t apic_id, uint32_t acpi_id, uint32_t pxm);
  * from the initial startup. We map APIC_BASE very early in page_setup(),
  * so this is correct in the x86 case.
  */
-#define raw_smp_processor_id() (get_processor_id())
+#define smp_processor_id() get_processor_id()
 
 void __stop_this_cpu(void);
 
diff --git a/xen/include/xen/smp.h b/xen/include/xen/smp.h
index a64c9b3882..d5a3644611 100644
--- a/xen/include/xen/smp.h
+++ b/xen/include/xen/smp.h
@@ -65,8 +65,6 @@ void smp_call_function_interrupt(void);
 
 void smp_send_call_function_mask(const cpumask_t *mask);
 
-#define smp_processor_id() raw_smp_processor_id()
-
 int alloc_cpu_id(void);
 
 extern void *stack_base[NR_CPUS];
-- 
2.11.0


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

[Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper

[Andrew Cooper]

Use it to simplify the x86 microcode logic, taking the opportunity to drop the
-ENOMEM printks.

Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
---
CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
CC: Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>
CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
---
 xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c   |  9 ++-------
 xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c |  7 ++-----
 xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h          | 11 +++++++++++
 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
index 0998a36b5c..12a3b6b32c 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -299,11 +299,10 @@ static int get_ucode_from_buffer_amd(
         return -EINVAL;
     }
 
-    mc_amd->mpb = xmalloc_bytes(mpbuf->len);
+    mc_amd->mpb = xmemdup_bytes(mpbuf->data, mpbuf->len);
     if ( !mc_amd->mpb )
         return -ENOMEM;
     mc_amd->mpb_size = mpbuf->len;
-    memcpy(mc_amd->mpb, mpbuf->data, mpbuf->len);
 
     pr_debug("microcode: CPU%d size %zu, block size %u offset %zu equivID %#x rev %#x\n",
              smp_processor_id(), bufsize, mpbuf->len, *offset,
@@ -336,14 +335,10 @@ static int install_equiv_cpu_table(
         return -EINVAL;
     }
 
-    mc_amd->equiv_cpu_table = xmalloc_bytes(mpbuf->len);
+    mc_amd->equiv_cpu_table = xmemdup_bytes(mpbuf->data, mpbuf->len);
     if ( !mc_amd->equiv_cpu_table )
-    {
-        printk(KERN_ERR "microcode: Cannot allocate memory for equivalent cpu table\n");
         return -ENOMEM;
-    }
 
-    memcpy(mc_amd->equiv_cpu_table, mpbuf->data, mpbuf->len);
     mc_amd->equiv_cpu_table_size = mpbuf->len;
 
     return 0;
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
index 6ac5f98694..f26511da98 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -339,13 +339,10 @@ static long get_next_ucode_from_buffer(struct microcode_intel **mc,
         return -EINVAL;
     }
 
-    *mc = xmalloc_bytes(total_size);
+    *mc = xmemdup_bytes(mc_header, total_size);
     if ( *mc == NULL )
-    {
-        printk(KERN_ERR "microcode: error! Can not allocate memory\n");
         return -ENOMEM;
-    }
-    memcpy(*mc, (const void *)(buf + offset), total_size);
+
     return offset + total_size;
 }
 
diff --git a/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h b/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
index f515ceee2a..16979a117c 100644
--- a/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
+++ b/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
@@ -51,6 +51,17 @@
 #define xmalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xmalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
 #define xzalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xzalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
 
+/* Allocate untyped storage and copying an existing instance. */
+#define xmemdup_bytes(_src, _nr)                \
+    ({                                          \
+        unsigned long nr_ = (_nr);              \
+        void *dst_ = xmalloc_bytes(nr_);        \
+                                                \
+        if ( dst_ )                             \
+            memcpy(dst_, _src, nr_);            \
+        dst_;                                   \
+    })
+
 /* Free any of the above. */
 extern void xfree(void *);
 
-- 
2.11.0


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] xen: Drop raw_smp_processor_id()

[Julien Grall]

On 20/03/2020 21:24, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> There is only a single user of raw_smp_processor_id() left in the tree (and it
> is unconditionally compiled out).  Drop the alias from all architectures.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>

Acked-by: Julien Grall <jgrall@amazon.com>

Cheers,

> ---
> CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
> CC: Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>
> CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
> CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
> CC: Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>
> CC: Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@epam.com>
> ---
>   xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 2 +-
>   xen/include/asm-arm/smp.h        | 2 +-
>   xen/include/asm-x86/smp.h        | 2 +-
>   xen/include/xen/smp.h            | 2 --
>   4 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> index a053e43923..0998a36b5c 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> @@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ static int get_ucode_from_buffer_amd(
>       memcpy(mc_amd->mpb, mpbuf->data, mpbuf->len);
>   
>       pr_debug("microcode: CPU%d size %zu, block size %u offset %zu equivID %#x rev %#x\n",
> -             raw_smp_processor_id(), bufsize, mpbuf->len, *offset,
> +             smp_processor_id(), bufsize, mpbuf->len, *offset,
>                ((struct microcode_header_amd *)mc_amd->mpb)->processor_rev_id,
>                ((struct microcode_header_amd *)mc_amd->mpb)->patch_id);
>   
> diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/smp.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/smp.h
> index fdbcefa241..af5a2fe652 100644
> --- a/xen/include/asm-arm/smp.h
> +++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/smp.h
> @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ DECLARE_PER_CPU(cpumask_var_t, cpu_core_mask);
>   
>   #define cpu_is_offline(cpu) unlikely(!cpu_online(cpu))
>   
> -#define raw_smp_processor_id() (get_processor_id())
> +#define smp_processor_id() get_processor_id()
>   
>   /*
>    * Do we, for platform reasons, need to actually keep CPUs online when we
> diff --git a/xen/include/asm-x86/smp.h b/xen/include/asm-x86/smp.h
> index 6150363655..f7485f602e 100644
> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/smp.h
> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/smp.h
> @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ int cpu_add(uint32_t apic_id, uint32_t acpi_id, uint32_t pxm);
>    * from the initial startup. We map APIC_BASE very early in page_setup(),
>    * so this is correct in the x86 case.
>    */
> -#define raw_smp_processor_id() (get_processor_id())
> +#define smp_processor_id() get_processor_id()
>   
>   void __stop_this_cpu(void);
>   
> diff --git a/xen/include/xen/smp.h b/xen/include/xen/smp.h
> index a64c9b3882..d5a3644611 100644
> --- a/xen/include/xen/smp.h
> +++ b/xen/include/xen/smp.h
> @@ -65,8 +65,6 @@ void smp_call_function_interrupt(void);
>   
>   void smp_send_call_function_mask(const cpumask_t *mask);
>   
> -#define smp_processor_id() raw_smp_processor_id()
> -
>   int alloc_cpu_id(void);
>   
>   extern void *stack_base[NR_CPUS];
> 

-- 
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/4] x86/ucode/amd: Fix assertion in compare_patch()

[Wei Liu]

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 09:24:49PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> This is clearly a typo.
> 
> Fixes: 9da23943ccd "microcode: introduce a global cache of ucode patch"
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>

Reviewed-by: Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/4] x86/ucode: Fix error paths in apply_microcode()

[Wei Liu]

Actually CC Jan

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 09:24:50PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> In the unlikley case that patch application completes, but the resutling
> revision isn't expected, sig->rev doesn't get updated to match reality.
> 
> It will get adjusted the next time collect_cpu_info() gets called, but in the
> meantime Xen might operate on a state value.  Nothing good will come of this.

state -> stale

> 
> Rewrite the logic to always update the stashed revision, before worring about

worring -> worrying

> whether the attempt was a success or failure.
> 
> Take the opportunity to make the printk() messages as consistent as possible.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>

Reviewed-by: Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>

> ---
> -CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
> CC: Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>
> CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
> ---
>  xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c   | 14 +++++++-------
>  xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 22 +++++++++++-----------
>  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> index d4b2874de6..a053e43923 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> @@ -229,11 +229,11 @@ static enum microcode_match_result compare_patch(
>  
>  static int apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch)
>  {
> -    uint32_t rev;
>      int hw_err;
>      unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
>      struct cpu_signature *sig = &per_cpu(cpu_sig, cpu);
>      const struct microcode_header_amd *hdr;
> +    uint32_t rev, old_rev = sig->rev;
>  
>      if ( !patch )
>          return -ENOENT;
> @@ -249,6 +249,7 @@ static int apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch)
>  
>      /* get patch id after patching */
>      rdmsrl(MSR_AMD_PATCHLEVEL, rev);
> +    sig->rev = rev;
>  
>      /*
>       * Some processors leave the ucode blob mapping as UC after the update.
> @@ -259,15 +260,14 @@ static int apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch)
>      /* check current patch id and patch's id for match */
>      if ( hw_err || (rev != hdr->patch_id) )
>      {
> -        printk(KERN_ERR "microcode: CPU%d update from revision "
> -               "%#x to %#x failed\n", cpu, rev, hdr->patch_id);
> +        printk(XENLOG_ERR
> +               "microcode: CPU%u update rev %#x to %#x failed, result %#x\n",
> +               cpu, old_rev, hdr->patch_id, rev);
>          return -EIO;
>      }
>  
> -    printk(KERN_WARNING "microcode: CPU%d updated from revision %#x to %#x\n",
> -           cpu, sig->rev, hdr->patch_id);
> -
> -    sig->rev = rev;
> +    printk(XENLOG_WARNING "microcode: CPU%u updated from revision %#x to %#x\n",
> +           cpu, old_rev, hdr->patch_id);
>  
>      return 0;
>  }
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> index 5e9c2a9c7f..6ac5f98694 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> @@ -278,10 +278,10 @@ static enum microcode_match_result compare_patch(
>  static int apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch)
>  {
>      uint64_t msr_content;
> -    unsigned int val[2];
> -    unsigned int cpu_num = raw_smp_processor_id();
> +    unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
>      struct cpu_signature *sig = &this_cpu(cpu_sig);
>      const struct microcode_intel *mc_intel;
> +    uint32_t rev, old_rev = sig->rev;
>  
>      if ( !patch )
>          return -ENOENT;
> @@ -302,20 +302,20 @@ static int apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch)
>  
>      /* get the current revision from MSR 0x8B */
>      rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_UCODE_REV, msr_content);
> -    val[1] = (uint32_t)(msr_content >> 32);
> +    sig->rev = rev = msr_content >> 32;
>  
> -    if ( val[1] != mc_intel->hdr.rev )
> +    if ( rev != mc_intel->hdr.rev )
>      {
> -        printk(KERN_ERR "microcode: CPU%d update from revision "
> -               "%#x to %#x failed. Resulting revision is %#x.\n", cpu_num,
> -               sig->rev, mc_intel->hdr.rev, val[1]);
> +        printk(XENLOG_ERR
> +               "microcode: CPU%u update rev %#x to %#x failed, result %#x\n",
> +               cpu, old_rev, mc_intel->hdr.rev, rev);
>          return -EIO;
>      }
> -    printk(KERN_INFO "microcode: CPU%d updated from revision "
> -           "%#x to %#x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
> -           cpu_num, sig->rev, val[1], mc_intel->hdr.year,
> +
> +    printk(XENLOG_WARNING
> +           "microcode: CPU%u updated from revision %#x to %#x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
> +           cpu, old_rev, rev, mc_intel->hdr.year,
>             mc_intel->hdr.month, mc_intel->hdr.day);
> -    sig->rev = val[1];
>  
>      return 0;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.11.0
> 

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] xen: Drop raw_smp_processor_id()

[Wei Liu]

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 09:24:51PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> There is only a single user of raw_smp_processor_id() left in the tree (and it
> is unconditionally compiled out).  Drop the alias from all architectures.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>

Reviewed-by: Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper

[Wei Liu]

On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 09:24:52PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> Use it to simplify the x86 microcode logic, taking the opportunity to drop the
> -ENOMEM printks.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>

Reviewed-by: Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper

[Julien Grall]

Hi Andrew,

On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 at 21:26, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>
> Use it to simplify the x86 microcode logic, taking the opportunity to drop the
> -ENOMEM printks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
> ---
> CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
> CC: Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>
> CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
> ---
>  xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c   |  9 ++-------
>  xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c |  7 ++-----
>  xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h          | 11 +++++++++++

I did notice a few times in the past months where only the x86 folks
where CCed even when there are changes in common code.
Even if I am mostly likely going to be happy with the changes, you
should at least give the other maintainers an opportunity to
object/comment.

May I ask to CC all the relevant maintainers in the future?
scripts/add_maintainers.pl should do the job for you.

>  3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> index 0998a36b5c..12a3b6b32c 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> @@ -299,11 +299,10 @@ static int get_ucode_from_buffer_amd(
>          return -EINVAL;
>      }
>
> -    mc_amd->mpb = xmalloc_bytes(mpbuf->len);
> +    mc_amd->mpb = xmemdup_bytes(mpbuf->data, mpbuf->len);
>      if ( !mc_amd->mpb )
>          return -ENOMEM;
>      mc_amd->mpb_size = mpbuf->len;
> -    memcpy(mc_amd->mpb, mpbuf->data, mpbuf->len);
>
>      pr_debug("microcode: CPU%d size %zu, block size %u offset %zu equivID %#x rev %#x\n",
>               smp_processor_id(), bufsize, mpbuf->len, *offset,
> @@ -336,14 +335,10 @@ static int install_equiv_cpu_table(
>          return -EINVAL;
>      }
>
> -    mc_amd->equiv_cpu_table = xmalloc_bytes(mpbuf->len);
> +    mc_amd->equiv_cpu_table = xmemdup_bytes(mpbuf->data, mpbuf->len);
>      if ( !mc_amd->equiv_cpu_table )
> -    {
> -        printk(KERN_ERR "microcode: Cannot allocate memory for equivalent cpu table\n");
>          return -ENOMEM;
> -    }
>
> -    memcpy(mc_amd->equiv_cpu_table, mpbuf->data, mpbuf->len);
>      mc_amd->equiv_cpu_table_size = mpbuf->len;
>
>      return 0;
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> index 6ac5f98694..f26511da98 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> @@ -339,13 +339,10 @@ static long get_next_ucode_from_buffer(struct microcode_intel **mc,
>          return -EINVAL;
>      }
>
> -    *mc = xmalloc_bytes(total_size);
> +    *mc = xmemdup_bytes(mc_header, total_size);
>      if ( *mc == NULL )
> -    {
> -        printk(KERN_ERR "microcode: error! Can not allocate memory\n");
>          return -ENOMEM;
> -    }
> -    memcpy(*mc, (const void *)(buf + offset), total_size);
> +
>      return offset + total_size;
>  }
>
> diff --git a/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h b/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
> index f515ceee2a..16979a117c 100644
> --- a/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
> +++ b/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
> @@ -51,6 +51,17 @@
>  #define xmalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xmalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
>  #define xzalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xzalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
>
> +/* Allocate untyped storage and copying an existing instance. */
> +#define xmemdup_bytes(_src, _nr)                \
> +    ({                                          \
> +        unsigned long nr_ = (_nr);              \
> +        void *dst_ = xmalloc_bytes(nr_);        \

The nr_ vs _nr is really confusing to read. Could you re-implement the
function as a static inline?

Cheers,

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/4] x86/ucode: Fix error paths in apply_microcode()

[Jan Beulich]

On 20.03.2020 22:24, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> @@ -259,15 +260,14 @@ static int apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch)
>      /* check current patch id and patch's id for match */
>      if ( hw_err || (rev != hdr->patch_id) )
>      {
> -        printk(KERN_ERR "microcode: CPU%d update from revision "
> -               "%#x to %#x failed\n", cpu, rev, hdr->patch_id);
> +        printk(XENLOG_ERR
> +               "microcode: CPU%u update rev %#x to %#x failed, result %#x\n",
> +               cpu, old_rev, hdr->patch_id, rev);
>          return -EIO;
>      }
>  
> -    printk(KERN_WARNING "microcode: CPU%d updated from revision %#x to %#x\n",
> -           cpu, sig->rev, hdr->patch_id);
> -
> -    sig->rev = rev;
> +    printk(XENLOG_WARNING "microcode: CPU%u updated from revision %#x to %#x\n",
> +           cpu, old_rev, hdr->patch_id);

Prefer the local variable here over hdr->patch_id, just like you do
on the Intel side?

Jan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper

[Jan Beulich]

On 21.03.2020 23:19, Julien Grall wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 at 21:26, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>> --- a/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
>> @@ -51,6 +51,17 @@
>>  #define xmalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xmalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
>>  #define xzalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xzalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
>>
>> +/* Allocate untyped storage and copying an existing instance. */
>> +#define xmemdup_bytes(_src, _nr)                \
>> +    ({                                          \
>> +        unsigned long nr_ = (_nr);              \
>> +        void *dst_ = xmalloc_bytes(nr_);        \
> 
> The nr_ vs _nr is really confusing to read. Could you re-implement the
> function as a static inline?

And even if that wouldn't work out - what's the point of having
macro argument names with leading underscores? This isn't any
better standard-wise (afaict) than other uses of leading
underscores for identifiers which aren't CU-scope.

Jan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/4] x86/ucode: Cleanup - Part 2/n

[Jan Beulich]

On 20.03.2020 22:24, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> Two minor bugfixes, and two minor cleanups with minor benefits to other code
> as well.
> 
> There is no dependency on the remaining pieces of the Part 1 series.
> 
> Andrew Cooper (4):
>   x86/ucode/amd: Fix assertion in compare_patch()
>   x86/ucode: Fix error paths in apply_microcode()
>   xen: Drop raw_smp_processor_id()

FAOD feel free to throw in with Wei's R-b, ideally with the small
adjustment suggested for patch 2.

Jan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper

[Andrew Cooper]

On 21/03/2020 22:19, Julien Grall wrote:
>> diff --git a/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h b/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
>> index f515ceee2a..16979a117c 100644
>> --- a/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
>> @@ -51,6 +51,17 @@
>>  #define xmalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xmalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
>>  #define xzalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xzalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
>>
>> +/* Allocate untyped storage and copying an existing instance. */
>> +#define xmemdup_bytes(_src, _nr)                \
>> +    ({                                          \
>> +        unsigned long nr_ = (_nr);              \
>> +        void *dst_ = xmalloc_bytes(nr_);        \
> The nr_ vs _nr is really confusing to read. Could you re-implement the
> function as a static inline?

I'd really prefer to, but sadly not.

That requires untangling headers sufficiently so we can include
string.h, to be able to use memcpy.  I don't have time at the moment to
sort that out.

~Andrew

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper

[Andrew Cooper]

On 23/03/2020 08:38, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 21.03.2020 23:19, Julien Grall wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 at 21:26, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
>>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
>>> @@ -51,6 +51,17 @@
>>>  #define xmalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xmalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
>>>  #define xzalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xzalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
>>>
>>> +/* Allocate untyped storage and copying an existing instance. */
>>> +#define xmemdup_bytes(_src, _nr)                \
>>> +    ({                                          \
>>> +        unsigned long nr_ = (_nr);              \
>>> +        void *dst_ = xmalloc_bytes(nr_);        \
>> The nr_ vs _nr is really confusing to read. Could you re-implement the
>> function as a static inline?
> And even if that wouldn't work out - what's the point of having
> macro argument names with leading underscores?

Consistency with all the other code in this file.

>  This isn't any
> better standard-wise (afaict) than other uses of leading
> underscores for identifiers which aren't CU-scope.

It is a parameter describing textural replacement within the body. 
There is 0 interaction with external namespacing standards.

~Andrew

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper

[Jan Beulich]

On 26.03.2020 16:38, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 23/03/2020 08:38, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 21.03.2020 23:19, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 at 21:26, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> --- a/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
>>>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
>>>> @@ -51,6 +51,17 @@
>>>>  #define xmalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xmalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
>>>>  #define xzalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xzalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
>>>>
>>>> +/* Allocate untyped storage and copying an existing instance. */
>>>> +#define xmemdup_bytes(_src, _nr)                \
>>>> +    ({                                          \
>>>> +        unsigned long nr_ = (_nr);              \
>>>> +        void *dst_ = xmalloc_bytes(nr_);        \
>>> The nr_ vs _nr is really confusing to read. Could you re-implement the
>>> function as a static inline?
>> And even if that wouldn't work out - what's the point of having
>> macro argument names with leading underscores?
> 
> Consistency with all the other code in this file.

I value consistency quite high, but then please consistent with
something that properly follows other rules.

>>  This isn't any
>> better standard-wise (afaict) than other uses of leading
>> underscores for identifiers which aren't CU-scope.
> 
> It is a parameter describing textural replacement within the body. 
> There is 0 interaction with external namespacing standards.

Please forgive me saying so, but a typical reply I might get back
from you would be: And?

I'm not going to insist nor nak the patch, but I don't welcome
widening existing issues we have.

Jan

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper

[Julien Grall]

Hi Andrew,

On 26/03/2020 14:53, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 21/03/2020 22:19, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> diff --git a/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h b/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
>>> index f515ceee2a..16979a117c 100644
>>> --- a/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
>>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/xmalloc.h
>>> @@ -51,6 +51,17 @@
>>>   #define xmalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xmalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
>>>   #define xzalloc_bytes(_bytes) _xzalloc(_bytes, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)
>>>
>>> +/* Allocate untyped storage and copying an existing instance. */
>>> +#define xmemdup_bytes(_src, _nr)                \
>>> +    ({                                          \
>>> +        unsigned long nr_ = (_nr);              \
>>> +        void *dst_ = xmalloc_bytes(nr_);        \
>> The nr_ vs _nr is really confusing to read. Could you re-implement the
>> function as a static inline?
> 
> I'd really prefer to, but sadly not.
> 
> That requires untangling headers sufficiently so we can include
> string.h, to be able to use memcpy.  I don't have time at the moment to
> sort that out.

Ok :(. We will have to live with the macro for the time being then.

Acked-by: Julien Grall <jgrall@amazon.com>

Cheers,

-- 
Julien Grall