[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/ucode: allow cpu_request_microcode() to skip memory allocation
- To: Sergey Dyasli <sergey.dyasli@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 16:26:46 +0100
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=t66f3Y2FwsdAT7vTc+90QXObZppfXHBLj47/zI58Tgs=; b=ejGR8zTa1VIV751NAYJn2gqsTcCr2su3yjACTyPBA+ErFTohilGBsUFvRICctzlySvvMpw1z3LmuijmUn8B+2xemEgifpAMl/Yvh9kGA1F7dfx0Pqlnj34gilgmZJovAYo3HS/MRGL34x3/C5sTJ2mITM2Fefi1oWtr6FiHaxhzvVOrP6eDhEhJqQUJ6Uzo+YM26AQcggTlSxgNt8REy2+4G4DPL1cVZp5Ti+yDM06YZvFvlJzA4L3zhUUTk7QjXsrkikgk/K3HNGWDXecCKQ8cpCMLrhy24jRUHaiEklE5y1pr3JtA3v4vbnHOTG5PFbwujHAtuqf4aBgjf1z/Slw==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=LDxKMQJWAdKKtBJD3Wp/UMkUfkM7/lDioK/ctvo4cey0r2Ks0waNPByAweLqFtNrmt0BEf/H47jjC53LVU/WrvGWx3MQcrSXLAplNXt17MfFJ9ntbpTAeuJm0gL16sRCyNEu4v4Ypt8X1H2qXbcGHfqxVx6LitvWor1mYi5Oqy1Uzrsulw9Tmq3vSEhE/b9XpepmPXG4jHorKrk/loIgo1u7hKye1Y0DhbdJy7fyzJsIarXnxn2rKPNCwFO69DEwxZZHwXqZ+4ukawoI6tvKckt4wimZn1hkRNOGhPJVRPNWVmQoTvDupZdU6SUGb28EkeX4U+K6AGwQTONxFj6juw==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 15:26:55 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 08.12.2022 14:26, Sergey Dyasli wrote:
> @@ -648,7 +648,7 @@ static long cf_check microcode_update_helper(void *data)
> * this requirement can be relaxed in the future. Right now, this is
> * conservative and good.
> */
> - ret = stop_machine_run(do_microcode_update, patch, NR_CPUS);
> + ret = stop_machine_run(do_microcode_update, (void *)patch, NR_CPUS);
Just as a remark - callback function arguments like this one also would
be nice to be allowed to be pointer-to-const, but I guess we'd need to
introduce some trickery to allow such despite the lack of function
templates (and even if we had such, also to limit duplication of binary
code).
Jan
|
