On 19.08.2024 10:57, Fouad Hilly wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 12:30 PM Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: >> On 25.07.2024 10:27, Fouad Hilly wrote: >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c >>> @@ -90,6 +90,11 @@ struct ucode_mod_blob { >>> size_t size; >>> }; >>> >>> +struct patch_with_flags { >>> + unsigned int flags; >>> + struct microcode_patch *patch; >> >> Pointer-to-const? If the const was omitted here just because of >> microcode_free_patch(), then I think the issue should be taken care >> of there. > > This struct is required as is, I initially added a similar struct with > const (which was removed in v6). > updated control_thread_fn() > -static int control_thread_fn(const struct microcode_patch *patch) > +static int control_thread_fn(struct microcode_patch *patch, > + unsigned int flags)
And why's that change necessary, other than to cater for the omitted const in the struct? Jan