[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y2WOwEkjg4jR1rN8@zn.tnic>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 23:14:24 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "Joseph, Jithu" <jithu.joseph@...el.com>
Cc: hdegoede@...hat.com, markgross@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org,
hpa@...or.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, ashok.raj@...el.com,
tony.luck@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
ravi.v.shankar@...el.com, thiago.macieira@...el.com,
athenas.jimenez.gonzalez@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/14] x86/microcode/intel: Expose
microcode_sanity_check()
On Fri, Nov 04, 2022 at 03:02:42PM -0700, Joseph, Jithu wrote:
> Wanted to check with you, if it is okay to rename the first "reserved"
> field in microcode_header_intel to "metasize" today (as shown in the
> diff below) or would you prefer to do that too at a later point ?
> (doing so today will help to avoid redefining an IFS specific header
> struct, with this as the only change )
No objections - it is not used by the microcode loader anyway.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists