From: Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@amd.com>
To: "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@intel.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4]X86 microcode: cancel redundant input parameter of microcode functions
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 12:07:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200901221207.50153.Christoph.Egger@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <706158FABBBA044BAD4FE898A02E4BC2223BD483@pdsmsx503.ccr.corp.intel.com>
On Thursday 22 January 2009 11:54:15 Liu, Jinsong wrote:
> Christoph Egger wrote:
> > On Thursday 22 January 2009 04:08:21 Liu, Jinsong wrote:
> >> X86 microcode: cancel redundant input parameter of microcode
> >> functions
> >>
> >> Cancel redundant input parameter 'uci', since it can get from
> >> another input parameter 'cpu' as index.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Liu, Jinsong <jinsong.liu@intel.com>
> >
> > I added the parameter 'uci' to reduce dependency on a global variable.
> > That improves reentrancy and cache locality.
> >
> > If you want to go a step forward rather back, then remove the 'cpu'
> > parameter instead.
> >
> > Christoph
>
> I think the input parameter 'cpu' is better than 'uci' since 'cpu' is much
> clear to developer with explicit meaning, so between the 2 redundant
> parameters 'uci' and 'cpu', we should remove 'uci', just like what native
> linux microcode functions do.
What linux does, doesn't matter here. Dom0 just has to make the hypercall.
This is nothing linux specific.
> As for cache locality, it's not important for microcode functions since
> it's not in key path, seldom be called.
Right, but better reentrancy is always good.
> BTW, we'd better keep consistent
> with native linux code for the sake of futher porting and upgrade, you
> know, the latest linux kernel (2.6.28) still has some issues for microcode
> ...
You should have hear yourself.
Someone else can say:
BTW, we'd better keep consistent
with native Solaris code for the sake of further porting and upgrade. It
doesn't suffer on the Linux issues.
And another guy can say:
BTW, we'd better keep consistent with native BSD code for the sake
of further porting and upgrade.
You see what I mean?
Christoph
--
---to satisfy European Law for business letters:
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Karl-Hammerschmidt-Str. 34, 85609 Dornach b. Muenchen
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Jochen Polster, Thomas M. McCoy, Giuliano Meroni
Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen
Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-22 11:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-22 3:08 [PATCH 1/4]X86 microcode: cancel redundant input parameter of microcode functions Liu, Jinsong
2009-01-22 8:42 ` Christoph Egger
2009-01-22 10:54 ` Liu, Jinsong
2009-01-22 11:07 ` Christoph Egger [this message]
2009-01-22 11:14 ` Keir Fraser
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=200901221207.50153.Christoph.Egger@amd.com \
--to=christoph.egger@amd.com \
--cc=jinsong.liu@intel.com \
--cc=keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.