From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Subject: [patch 09/30] x86/microcode/intel: Remove debug code
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2023 20:37:39 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230810160805.480445927@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230810153317.850017756@linutronix.de>
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
This is really of dubious value.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 65 ----------------------------------
1 file changed, 65 deletions(-)
---
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -10,15 +10,7 @@
* Copyright (C) 2012 Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
* H Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
*/
-
-/*
- * This needs to be before all headers so that pr_debug in printk.h doesn't turn
- * printk calls into no_printk().
- *
- *#define DEBUG
- */
#define pr_fmt(fmt) "microcode: " fmt
-
#include <linux/earlycpio.h>
#include <linux/firmware.h>
#include <linux/uaccess.h>
@@ -310,59 +302,6 @@ scan_microcode(void *data, size_t size,
return patch;
}
-static void show_saved_mc(void)
-{
-#ifdef DEBUG
- unsigned int sig, pf, rev, total_size, data_size, date;
- struct extended_sigtable *ext_header;
- struct extended_signature *ext_sig;
- struct ucode_cpu_info uci;
- int j, ext_sigcount;
-
- if (!intel_ucode_patch) {
- pr_debug("no microcode data saved.\n");
- return;
- }
-
- intel_cpu_collect_info(&uci);
-
- sig = uci.cpu_sig.sig;
- pf = uci.cpu_sig.pf;
- rev = uci.cpu_sig.rev;
- pr_debug("CPU: sig=0x%x, pf=0x%x, rev=0x%x\n", sig, pf, rev);
-
- sig = intel_ucode_patch->hdr.sig;
- pf = intel_ucode_patch->hdr.pf;
- rev = intel_ucode_patch->hdr.rev;
- date = intel_ucode_patch->hdr.date;
-
- total_size = get_totalsize(mc_saved_header);
- data_size = intel_microcode_get_datasize(mc_saved_header);
-
- pr_debug("mc_saved: sig=0x%x, pf=0x%x, rev=0x%x, total size=0x%x, date = %04x-%02x-%02x\n",
- sig, pf, rev, total_size, date & 0xffff,
- date >> 24, (date >> 16) & 0xff);
-
- /* Look for ext. headers: */
- if (total_size <= data_size + MC_HEADER_SIZE)
- return;
-
- ext_header = (void *)intel_ucode_patch + data_size + MC_HEADER_SIZE;
- ext_sigcount = ext_header->count;
- ext_sig = (void *)ext_header + EXT_HEADER_SIZE;
-
- for (j = 0; j < ext_sigcount; j++) {
- sig = ext_sig->sig;
- pf = ext_sig->pf;
-
- pr_debug("\tExtended[%d]: sig=0x%x, pf=0x%x\n",
- j, sig, pf);
-
- ext_sig++;
- }
-#endif
-}
-
/*
* Save this microcode patch. It will be loaded early when a CPU is
* hot-added or resumes.
@@ -375,7 +314,6 @@ static void save_mc_for_early(struct uco
mutex_lock(&x86_cpu_microcode_mutex);
save_microcode_patch(mc, size);
- show_saved_mc();
mutex_unlock(&x86_cpu_microcode_mutex);
}
@@ -526,9 +464,6 @@ int __init save_microcode_in_initrd_inte
intel_cpu_collect_info(&uci);
scan_microcode(cp.data, cp.size, &uci, true);
-
- show_saved_mc();
-
return 0;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-10 18:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-10 18:37 [patch 00/30] x86/microcode: Cleanup and late loading enhancements Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 01/30] x86/mm: Remove unused microcode.h include Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 02/30] x86/microcode: Hide the config knob Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 20:41 ` Ashok Raj
2023-08-11 11:22 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 03/30] x86/microcode/intel: Move microcode functions out of cpu/intel.c Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 04/30] x86/microcode: Include vendor headers into microcode.h Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 05/30] x86/microcode: Make reload_early_microcode() static Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 06/30] x86/microcode/intel: Rename get_datasize() since its used externally Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 07/30] x86/microcode: Move core specific defines to local header Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 08/30] x86/microcode/intel: Rip out mixed stepping support for Intel CPUs Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-11 22:25 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-08-12 7:16 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2023-08-11 10:45 ` [patch 09/30] x86/microcode/intel: Remove debug code Nikolay Borisov
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 10/30] x86/microcode: Remove pointless mutex Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 11/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify scan_microcode() Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 12/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify and rename generic_load_microcode() Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 13/30] x86/microcode/intel: Cleanup code further Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-11 11:01 ` Nikolay Borisov
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 14/30] x86/microcode/intel: Simplify early loading Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 15/30] x86/microcode/intel: Save the microcode only after a successful late-load Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 16/30] x86/microcode/intel: Switch to kvmalloc() Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 17/30] x86/microcode/intel: Unify microcode apply() functions Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 18/30] x86/microcode: Handle "nosmt" correctly Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 19/30] x86/microcode: Clarify the late load logic Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 20/30] x86/microcode: Sanitize __wait_for_cpus() Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 21/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU result state Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:37 ` [patch 22/30] x86/microcode: Add per CPU control field Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:38 ` [patch 23/30] x86/microcode: Provide new control functions Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 20:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-10 18:38 ` [patch 24/30] x86/microcode: Replace the all in one rendevouz handler Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:38 ` [patch 25/30] x86/microcode: Rendezvous and load in NMI Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:38 ` [patch 26/30] x86/microcode: Protect against instrumentation Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 20:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-11 9:19 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:38 ` [patch 27/30] x86/apic: Provide apic_force_nmi_on_cpu() Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:38 ` [patch 28/30] x86/microcode: Handle "offline" CPUs correctly Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 20:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-10 20:50 ` Ashok Raj
2023-08-10 21:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-10 21:49 ` Ashok Raj
2023-08-10 22:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-10 23:02 ` Ashok Raj
2023-08-11 1:19 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-11 1:31 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-11 9:36 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-12 16:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 18:38 ` [patch 29/30] x86/microcode: Prepare for minimal revision check Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-10 20:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-11 9:38 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-08-11 14:20 ` Arjan van de Ven
2023-08-10 18:38 ` [patch 30/30] x86/microcode/intel: Add a minimum required revision for late-loads Thomas Gleixner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230810160805.480445927@linutronix.de \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome