On 12.07.2024 15:07, Fouad Hilly wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c
> @@ -90,6 +90,16 @@ struct ucode_mod_blob {
> size_t size;
> };
>
> +struct microcode_patch_with_flags {
> + unsigned int flags;
> + struct microcode_patch *patch;
> +};
> +
> +struct microcode_nmi_patch_with_flags {
> + unsigned int flags;
> + const struct microcode_patch *patch;
> +};
Why two different structures? I have to admit that I can't spot where the
difference (const or not) would matter?
Also for an internal struct I don't think you need the microcode_ prefixes.
> @@ -284,21 +286,22 @@ static enum microcode_match_result cf_check
> compare_patch(
> return compare_revisions(old->rev, new->rev);
> }
>
> -static int cf_check apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch)
> +static int cf_check apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch,
> + unsigned int flags)
> {
> uint64_t msr_content;
> unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> struct cpu_signature *sig = &this_cpu(cpu_sig);
> uint32_t rev, old_rev = sig->rev;
> enum microcode_match_result result;
> + bool ucode_force = flags == XENPF_UCODE_FORCE;
Why == ? The term "flags" usually stands for there being multiple boolean
indicators in a single value. That would demand use of & here.
Jan
