[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2022 17:23:48 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Jithu Joseph <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, sohil.mehta@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/14] platform/x86/intel/ifs: Use generic microcode
headers and functions
On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 02:53:18PM -0800, Jithu Joseph wrote:
> static int scan_chunks_sanity_check(struct device *dev)
> {
> - int metadata_size, curr_pkg, cpu, ret = -ENOMEM;
> struct ifs_data *ifsd = ifs_get_data(dev);
> + int curr_pkg, cpu, ret = -ENOMEM;
> bool *package_authenticated;
> struct ifs_work local_work;
> - char *test_ptr;
>
> package_authenticated = kcalloc(topology_max_packages(), sizeof(bool), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!package_authenticated)
> return ret;
Bah, how big is that thing so that you can't simply do a bitfield on the
stack here instead of kcalloc-ing?
> @@ -203,67 +174,33 @@ static int scan_chunks_sanity_check(struct device *dev)
> return ret;
> }
>
> -static int ifs_sanity_check(struct device *dev,
> - const struct microcode_header_intel *mc_header)
> +static int ifs_image_sanity_check(struct device *dev, const struct microcode_header_intel *data)
Yet another static function - no need for the ifs_ prefix.
...
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists