linux-kernel - [patch 13/30] x86/microcode/intel: Cleanup code further

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230810160805.710329611@linutronix.de>
Date:   Thu, 10 Aug 2023 20:37:45 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     x86@...nel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: [patch 13/30] x86/microcode/intel: Cleanup code further

From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>

Sanitize the microcode scan loop, fixup printks and move the initrd loading
function next to the place where it is used and mark it __init. Rename
generic_load_microcode() as that Intel specific function is not generic at
all.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>

---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c |   82 +++++++++++++---------------------
 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ static const char ucode_path[] = "kernel
 static struct microcode_intel *intel_ucode_patch __read_mostly;
 
 /* last level cache size per core */
-static int llc_size_per_core __ro_after_init;
+static unsigned int llc_size_per_core __ro_after_init;
 
 int intel_cpu_collect_info(struct ucode_cpu_info *uci)
 {
@@ -275,37 +275,10 @@ static struct microcode_intel *scan_micr
 	return patch;
 }
 
-static bool load_builtin_intel_microcode(struct cpio_data *cp)
-{
-	unsigned int eax = 1, ebx, ecx = 0, edx;
-	struct firmware fw;
-	char name[30];
-
-	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32))
-		return false;
-
-	native_cpuid(&eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
-
-	sprintf(name, "intel-ucode/%02x-%02x-%02x",
-		      x86_family(eax), x86_model(eax), x86_stepping(eax));
-
-	if (firmware_request_builtin(&fw, name)) {
-		cp->size = fw.size;
-		cp->data = (void *)fw.data;
-		return true;
-	}
-
-	return false;
-}
-
 static void print_ucode_info(int old_rev, int new_rev, unsigned int date)
 {
 	pr_info_once("updated early: 0x%x -> 0x%x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
-		     old_rev,
-		     new_rev,
-		     date & 0xffff,
-		     date >> 24,
-		     (date >> 16) & 0xff);
+		     old_rev, new_rev, date & 0xffff, date >> 24, (date >> 16) & 0xff);
 }
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
@@ -399,6 +372,28 @@ static int apply_microcode_early(struct
 	return 0;
 }
 
+static bool load_builtin_intel_microcode(struct cpio_data *cp)
+{
+	unsigned int eax = 1, ebx, ecx = 0, edx;
+	struct firmware fw;
+	char name[30];
+
+	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32))
+		return false;
+
+	native_cpuid(&eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
+
+	sprintf(name, "intel-ucode/%02x-%02x-%02x",
+		x86_family(eax), x86_model(eax), x86_stepping(eax));
+
+	if (firmware_request_builtin(&fw, name)) {
+		cp->size = fw.size;
+		cp->data = (void *)fw.data;
+		return true;
+	}
+	return false;
+}
+
 int __init save_microcode_in_initrd_intel(void)
 {
 	struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
@@ -490,25 +485,16 @@ void load_ucode_intel_ap(void)
 	apply_microcode_early(&uci, true);
 }
 
-/* Accessor for microcode pointer */
-static struct microcode_intel *ucode_get_patch(void)
-{
-	return intel_ucode_patch;
-}
-
 void reload_ucode_intel(void)
 {
-	struct microcode_intel *p;
 	struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
 
 	intel_cpu_collect_info(&uci);
 
-	p = ucode_get_patch();
-	if (!p)
+	uci.mc = intel_ucode_patch;
+	if (!uci.mc)
 		return;
 
-	uci.mc = p;
-
 	apply_microcode_early(&uci, false);
 }
 
@@ -546,8 +532,7 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_
 	if (WARN_ON(raw_smp_processor_id() != cpu))
 		return UCODE_ERROR;
 
-	/* Look for a newer patch in our cache: */
-	mc = ucode_get_patch();
+	mc = intel_ucode_patch;
 	if (!mc) {
 		mc = uci->mc;
 		if (!mc)
@@ -738,18 +723,17 @@ static enum ucode_state request_microcod
 }
 
 static struct microcode_ops microcode_intel_ops = {
-	.request_microcode_fw             = request_microcode_fw,
-	.collect_cpu_info                 = collect_cpu_info,
-	.apply_microcode                  = apply_microcode_intel,
+	.request_microcode_fw	= request_microcode_fw,
+	.collect_cpu_info	= collect_cpu_info,
+	.apply_microcode	= apply_microcode_intel,
 };
 
-static int __init calc_llc_size_per_core(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
+static __init void calc_llc_size_per_core(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
 {
 	u64 llc_size = c->x86_cache_size * 1024ULL;
 
 	do_div(llc_size, c->x86_max_cores);
-
-	return (int)llc_size;
+	llc_size_per_core = (unsigned int)llc_size;
 }
 
 struct microcode_ops * __init init_intel_microcode(void)
@@ -762,7 +746,7 @@ struct microcode_ops * __init init_intel
 		return NULL;
 	}
 
-	llc_size_per_core = calc_llc_size_per_core(c);
+	calc_llc_size_per_core(c);
 
 	return &microcode_intel_ops;
 }