Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 4/8] microcode: delete 'mc' field from struct ucode_cpu_info

[Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the cleanup!

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 03:06:46PM +0800, Chao Gao wrote:
> diff --git a/xen/include/asm-x86/microcode.h b/xen/include/asm-x86/microcode.h
> index fc98fed..507da2e 100644
> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/microcode.h
> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/microcode.h
> @@ -19,7 +19,6 @@ struct microcode_patch {
>  };
>  
>  struct microcode_ops {
> -    int (*microcode_resume_match)(unsigned int cpu, const void *mc);
>      int (*cpu_request_microcode)(unsigned int cpu, const void *buf,
>                                   size_t size);
>      int (*collect_cpu_info)(unsigned int cpu, struct cpu_signature *csig);
> @@ -39,11 +38,6 @@ struct cpu_signature {
>  
>  struct ucode_cpu_info {
>      struct cpu_signature cpu_sig;
> -    union {
> -        struct microcode_intel *mc_intel;
> -        struct microcode_amd *mc_amd;
> -        void *mc_valid;
> -    } mc;
>  };

Is there really a need for such structure since it only has one field
now?

I'm trying to figure out whether this is expanded by further patches,
but it seems like it's not, if so please remove the struct altogether.

I'm also wondering whether it's needed to store the cpu signature in
the pcpu area, AFAICT you always call collect_cpu_info before
apply_microcode, at which point cpu_signature could be stored in the
stack and passed to apply_microcode as a parameter?

Or apply_microcode could call collect_cpu_info directly. Getting rid
of the pcpu field would also allow you to get rid of
microcode_fini_cpu, further cleaning the code.

Thanks, Roger.

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