The microcode suffix is redundant, and "microcode loading" is the more common
term
---
 xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c     |  6 +++---
 xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c    | 27 ++++++++++++++++-----------
 xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c   |  8 ++++----
 xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/private.h |  7 +++----
 4 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
index 3f147c10ca67..1845f51ba330 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
@@ -214,8 +214,8 @@ static enum microcode_match_result cf_check compare_patch(
     return compare_header(new, old);
 }
 
-static int cf_check apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch,
-                                    unsigned int flags)
+static int cf_check amd_ucode_load(const struct microcode_patch *patch,
+                                   unsigned int flags)
 {
     int hw_err;
     unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
@@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ static struct microcode_patch *cf_check amd_ucode_parse(
 static const struct microcode_ops __initconst_cf_clobber amd_ucode_ops = {
     .parse                            = amd_ucode_parse,
     .collect_cpu_info                 = collect_cpu_info,
-    .apply_microcode                  = apply_microcode,
+    .load                             = amd_ucode_load,
     .compare_patch                    = compare_patch,
 };
 
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c
index 29655a44ae62..f320ea87c1dc 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c
@@ -229,6 +229,12 @@ static const struct microcode_patch *ucode_parse(const char *buf, size_t len)
     return alternative_call(ucode_ops.parse, buf, len, false);
 }
 
+/* Load a ucode blob.  Returns -errno. */
+static int ucode_load(const struct microcode_patch *patch, unsigned int flags)
+{
+    return alternative_call(ucode_ops.load, patch, flags);
+}
+
 static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(microcode_mutex);
 
 DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct cpu_signature, cpu_sig);
@@ -333,11 +339,10 @@ static int microcode_update_cpu(const struct microcode_patch *patch,
 
     spin_lock(&microcode_mutex);
     if ( patch )
-        err = alternative_call(ucode_ops.apply_microcode, patch, flags);
+        err = ucode_load(patch, flags);
     else if ( microcode_cache )
     {
-        err = alternative_call(ucode_ops.apply_microcode, microcode_cache,
-                               flags);
+        err = ucode_load(microcode_cache, flags);
         if ( err == -EIO )
         {
             microcode_free_patch(microcode_cache);
@@ -388,7 +393,7 @@ static int primary_thread_work(const struct microcode_patch *patch,
     if ( !wait_for_state(LOADING_ENTER) )
         return -EBUSY;
 
-    ret = alternative_call(ucode_ops.apply_microcode, patch, flags);
+    ret = ucode_load(patch, flags);
     if ( !ret )
         atomic_inc(&cpu_updated);
     atomic_inc(&cpu_out);
@@ -502,7 +507,7 @@ static int control_thread_fn(const struct microcode_patch *patch,
         goto out;
 
     /* Control thread loads ucode first while others are in NMI handler. */
-    ret = alternative_call(ucode_ops.apply_microcode, patch, flags);
+    ret = ucode_load(patch, flags);
     if ( !ret )
         atomic_inc(&cpu_updated);
     atomic_inc(&cpu_out);
@@ -731,7 +736,7 @@ int ucode_update_hcall(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(const_void) buf,
     if ( flags & ~XENPF_UCODE_FORCE )
         return -EINVAL;
 
-    if ( !ucode_ops.apply_microcode )
+    if ( !ucode_ops.load )
         return -EINVAL;
 
     buffer = xmalloc_flex_struct(struct ucode_buf, buffer, len);
@@ -783,7 +788,7 @@ int microcode_update_one(void)
     if ( ucode_ops.collect_cpu_info )
         alternative_vcall(ucode_ops.collect_cpu_info);
 
-    if ( !ucode_ops.apply_microcode )
+    if ( !ucode_ops.load )
         return -EOPNOTSUPP;
 
     return microcode_update_cpu(NULL, 0);
@@ -821,7 +826,7 @@ int __init microcode_init_cache(struct boot_info *bi)
 {
     int rc = 0;
 
-    if ( !ucode_ops.apply_microcode )
+    if ( !ucode_ops.load )
         return -ENODEV;
 
     if ( ucode_scan )
@@ -907,11 +912,11 @@ int __init early_microcode_init(struct boot_info *bi)
      *
      * Take the hint in either case and ignore the microcode interface.
      */
-    if ( !ucode_ops.apply_microcode || this_cpu(cpu_sig).rev == ~0 )
+    if ( !ucode_ops.load || this_cpu(cpu_sig).rev == ~0 )
     {
         printk(XENLOG_INFO "Microcode loading disabled due to: %s\n",
-               ucode_ops.apply_microcode ? "rev = ~0" : "HW toggle");
-        ucode_ops.apply_microcode = NULL;
+               ucode_ops.load ? "rev = ~0" : "HW toggle");
+        ucode_ops.load = NULL;
         return -ENODEV;
     }
 
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
index 3d3f7e57db80..5e6863fd8c9f 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -287,8 +287,8 @@ static enum microcode_match_result cf_check compare_patch(
     return compare_revisions(old->rev, new->rev);
 }
 
-static int cf_check apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch,
-                                    unsigned int flags)
+static int cf_check intel_ucode_load(const struct microcode_patch *patch,
+                                     unsigned int flags)
 {
     uint64_t msr_content;
     unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
@@ -408,7 +408,7 @@ static bool __init can_load_microcode(void)
 static const struct microcode_ops __initconst_cf_clobber intel_ucode_ops = {
     .parse                            = intel_ucode_parse,
     .collect_cpu_info                 = collect_cpu_info,
-    .apply_microcode                  = apply_microcode,
+    .load                             = intel_ucode_load,
     .compare_patch                    = compare_patch,
 };
 
@@ -417,5 +417,5 @@ void __init ucode_probe_intel(struct microcode_ops *ops)
     *ops = intel_ucode_ops;
 
     if ( !can_load_microcode() )
-        ops->apply_microcode = NULL;
+        ops->load = NULL;
 }
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/private.h b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/private.h
index e30acee1536b..9611efaa979c 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/private.h
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/private.h
@@ -50,8 +50,7 @@ struct microcode_ops {
      * Attempt to load the provided patch into the CPU.  Returns an error if
      * anything didn't go as expected.
      */
-    int (*apply_microcode)(const struct microcode_patch *patch,
-                           unsigned int flags);
+    int (*load)(const struct microcode_patch *patch, unsigned int flags);
 
     /*
      * Given two patches, are they both applicable to the current CPU, and is
@@ -68,8 +67,8 @@ struct microcode_ops {
  *   - Loading available
  *
  * These are encoded by (not) filling in ops->collect_cpu_info (i.e. no
- * support available) and (not) ops->apply_microcode (i.e. read only).
- * Otherwise, all hooks must be filled in.
+ * support available) and (not) ops->load (i.e. read only).  Otherwise, all
+ * hooks must be filled in.
  */
 #ifdef CONFIG_AMD
 void ucode_probe_amd(struct microcode_ops *ops);
-- 
2.39.5

On 24.10.2024 15:22, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> The microcode suffix is redundant, and "microcode loading" is the more common
> term

Just to mention it - much like the microcode suffix is redundant, ...

> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> @@ -214,8 +214,8 @@ static enum microcode_match_result cf_check compare_patch(
>      return compare_header(new, old);
>  }
>  
> -static int cf_check apply_microcode(const struct microcode_patch *patch,
> -                                    unsigned int flags)
> +static int cf_check amd_ucode_load(const struct microcode_patch *patch,
> +                                   unsigned int flags)
>  {

... the ucode infix is as well. Arguably even the amd prefix is redundant
(with the file name). I won't insist on either adjustment, though.

Jan

On 2024-10-24 09:22, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> The microcode suffix is redundant, and "microcode loading" is the more common
> term

Missing your S-o-B.

With that:

Reviewed-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>