* [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/4] x86/ucode/amd: Fix assertion in compare_patch()
2020-03-20 21:24 [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/4] x86/ucode: Cleanup - Part 2/n Andrew Cooper
@ 2020-03-20 21:24 ` Andrew Cooper
2020-03-21 16:45 ` Wei Liu
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/4] x86/ucode: Fix error paths in apply_microcode() Andrew Cooper
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cooper @ 2020-03-20 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xen-devel; +Cc: Andrew Cooper, Wei Liu, Jan Beulich, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/4] x86/ucode: Fix error paths in apply_microcode()
2020-03-20 21:24 [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/4] x86/ucode: Cleanup - Part 2/n Andrew Cooper
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/4] x86/ucode/amd: Fix assertion in compare_patch() Andrew Cooper
@ 2020-03-20 21:24 ` Andrew Cooper
2020-03-21 16:49 ` Wei Liu
2020-03-23 8:32 ` Jan Beulich
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] xen: Drop raw_smp_processor_id() Andrew Cooper
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cooper @ 2020-03-20 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xen-devel; +Cc: Andrew Cooper, Wei Liu, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/4] x86/ucode: Fix error paths in apply_microcode()
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/4] x86/ucode: Fix error paths in apply_microcode() Andrew Cooper
@ 2020-03-21 16:49 ` Wei Liu
2020-03-23 8:32 ` Jan Beulich
1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Wei Liu @ 2020-03-21 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cooper; +Cc: Xen-devel, Jan Beulich, Wei Liu, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/4] x86/ucode: Fix error paths in apply_microcode()
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/4] x86/ucode: Fix error paths in apply_microcode() Andrew Cooper
2020-03-21 16:49 ` Wei Liu
@ 2020-03-23 8:32 ` Jan Beulich
1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2020-03-23 8:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cooper; +Cc: Xen-devel, Wei Liu, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] xen: Drop raw_smp_processor_id()
2020-03-20 21:24 [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/4] x86/ucode: Cleanup - Part 2/n Andrew Cooper
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/4] x86/ucode/amd: Fix assertion in compare_patch() Andrew Cooper
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/4] x86/ucode: Fix error paths in apply_microcode() Andrew Cooper
@ 2020-03-20 21:24 ` Andrew Cooper
2020-03-21 10:14 ` Julien Grall
2020-03-21 16:50 ` Wei Liu
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper Andrew Cooper
2020-03-23 8:41 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/4] x86/ucode: Cleanup - Part 2/n Jan Beulich
4 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cooper @ 2020-03-20 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xen-devel
Cc: Stefano Stabellini, Julien Grall, Wei Liu, Andrew Cooper,
Jan Beulich, Volodymyr Babchuk, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] xen: Drop raw_smp_processor_id()
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] xen: Drop raw_smp_processor_id() Andrew Cooper
@ 2020-03-21 10:14 ` Julien Grall
2020-03-21 16:50 ` Wei Liu
1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Julien Grall @ 2020-03-21 10:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cooper, Xen-devel
Cc: Stefano Stabellini, Volodymyr Babchuk, Wei Liu, Jan Beulich,
Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] xen: Drop raw_smp_processor_id()
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] xen: Drop raw_smp_processor_id() Andrew Cooper
2020-03-21 10:14 ` Julien Grall
@ 2020-03-21 16:50 ` Wei Liu
1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Wei Liu @ 2020-03-21 16:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cooper
Cc: Stefano Stabellini, Julien Grall, Wei Liu, Jan Beulich,
Xen-devel, Volodymyr Babchuk, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper
2020-03-20 21:24 [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/4] x86/ucode: Cleanup - Part 2/n Andrew Cooper
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] xen: Drop raw_smp_processor_id() Andrew Cooper
@ 2020-03-20 21:24 ` Andrew Cooper
2020-03-21 16:51 ` Wei Liu
2020-03-21 22:19 ` Julien Grall
2020-03-23 8:41 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/4] x86/ucode: Cleanup - Part 2/n Jan Beulich
4 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cooper @ 2020-03-20 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xen-devel; +Cc: Andrew Cooper, Wei Liu, Jan Beulich, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper Andrew Cooper
@ 2020-03-21 16:51 ` Wei Liu
2020-03-21 22:19 ` Julien Grall
1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Wei Liu @ 2020-03-21 16:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cooper; +Cc: Xen-devel, Wei Liu, Jan Beulich, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper Andrew Cooper
2020-03-21 16:51 ` Wei Liu
@ 2020-03-21 22:19 ` Julien Grall
2020-03-23 8:38 ` Jan Beulich
2020-03-26 14:53 ` Andrew Cooper
1 sibling, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Julien Grall @ 2020-03-21 22:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cooper; +Cc: Xen-devel, Jan Beulich, Wei Liu, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper
2020-03-21 22:19 ` Julien Grall
@ 2020-03-23 8:38 ` Jan Beulich
2020-03-26 15:38 ` Andrew Cooper
2020-03-26 14:53 ` Andrew Cooper
1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2020-03-23 8:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julien Grall, Andrew Cooper; +Cc: Xen-devel, Wei Liu, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper
2020-03-23 8:38 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2020-03-26 15:38 ` Andrew Cooper
2020-03-26 15:47 ` Jan Beulich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cooper @ 2020-03-26 15:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich, Julien Grall; +Cc: Xen-devel, Wei Liu, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper
2020-03-26 15:38 ` Andrew Cooper
@ 2020-03-26 15:47 ` Jan Beulich
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2020-03-26 15:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cooper; +Cc: Xen-devel, Roger Pau Monné, Wei Liu, Julien Grall
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper
2020-03-21 22:19 ` Julien Grall
2020-03-23 8:38 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2020-03-26 14:53 ` Andrew Cooper
2020-03-26 19:05 ` Julien Grall
1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cooper @ 2020-03-26 14:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julien Grall; +Cc: Xen-devel, Jan Beulich, Wei Liu, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper
2020-03-26 14:53 ` Andrew Cooper
@ 2020-03-26 19:05 ` Julien Grall
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Julien Grall @ 2020-03-26 19:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cooper, Julien Grall
Cc: Xen-devel, Jan Beulich, Wei Liu, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/4] x86/ucode: Cleanup - Part 2/n
2020-03-20 21:24 [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/4] x86/ucode: Cleanup - Part 2/n Andrew Cooper
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2020-03-20 21:24 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen: Introduce a xmemdup_bytes() helper Andrew Cooper
@ 2020-03-23 8:41 ` Jan Beulich
4 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2020-03-23 8:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Cooper
Cc: Stefano Stabellini, Julien Grall, Wei Liu, Xen-devel,
Volodymyr Babchuk, Roger Pau Monné
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread