On 27.01.2026 15:34, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c
> @@ -760,6 +760,7 @@ static int __init early_microcode_load(struct boot_info
> *bi)
> void *data = NULL;
> size_t size;
> struct microcode_patch *patch;
> + struct cpio_data cd;
> int idx = opt_mod_idx;
> int rc;
>
> @@ -776,7 +777,6 @@ static int __init early_microcode_load(struct boot_info
> *bi)
> for ( idx = 0; idx < bi->nr_modules; ++idx )
> {
> const struct boot_module *bm = &bi->mods[idx];
> - struct cpio_data cd;
>
> /* Search anything unclaimed or likely to be a CPIO archive. */
> if ( bm->kind != BOOTMOD_UNKNOWN && bm->kind != BOOTMOD_RAMDISK )
> @@ -844,6 +844,18 @@ static int __init early_microcode_load(struct boot_info
> *bi)
> idx, size);
> return -ENODEV;
> }
> +
> + /*
> + * If this blob appears to be a CPIO archive, try interpreting it as
> + * one. Otherwise treat it as a raw vendor blob.
> + */
> + cd = find_cpio_data(ucode_ops.cpio_path, data, size);
> + if ( cd.data )
> + {
> + data = cd.data;
> + size = cd.size;
> + }
> +
> goto found;
> }
Doesn't microcode_init_cache() then need similar adjustment?
Jan
