[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/x86: Move microcode into its own directory
On 18.03.2020 22:42, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 18/03/2020 21:05, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> Split the existing asm/microcode.h in half, keeping the per-cpu cpu_sig >> available to external users, and moving everything else into private.h >> >> Take the opportunity to trim and clean up the include lists for all 3 source >> files, all of which include rather more than necessary. >> >> No functional change. >> >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> >> CC: Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx> >> CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Inclusion of asm/flushtlb.h in isolation was broken by c/s 80943aa40e, and >> the >> commit message even states this breakage. I'm surprised it got accepted. >> >> Either this needs fixing, or the 23(!) other files including asm/flushtlb.h >> should be adjusted. Personally I don't think it is reasonable to require >> including xen/mm.h just to get at tlb flushing functionality, but I also >> can't >> spot an obvious way to untangle the dependencies (hence the TODO). > > Actually, I've found that microcode_free_patch() has no external callers. > > I've folded the following delta in, to avoid moving a useless function > declaration > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/microcode/core.c b/xen/arch/x86/microcode/core.c > index e99f4ab06c..19e1d4b221 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/x86/microcode/core.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/microcode/core.c > @@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ static struct microcode_patch *parse_blob(const char > *buf, size_t len) > return NULL; > } > > -void microcode_free_patch(struct microcode_patch *microcode_patch) > +static void microcode_free_patch(struct microcode_patch *microcode_patch) > { > microcode_ops->free_patch(microcode_patch->mc); > xfree(microcode_patch); > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/microcode/private.h > b/xen/arch/x86/microcode/private.h > index 97c7405dad..2e3be79eaf 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/x86/microcode/private.h > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/microcode/private.h > @@ -34,6 +34,4 @@ struct microcode_ops { > > extern const struct microcode_ops *microcode_ops; > > -void microcode_free_patch(struct microcode_patch *patch); > - > #endif /* ASM_X86_MICROCODE_PRIVATE_H */ > > > Alternatively, I might consider pulling this and the similar change to > early_microcode_update_cpu() into an earlier patch, to separate the > static-ing of functions from the general moving of code/declarations. > > Thoughts? Either way is fine by me, and can have my ack right away. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |