Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 25 Jul 2023 11:20:46 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@amd.com>,
        Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@amd.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Fix amd_check_microcode() declaration
Message-ID: <20230725092046.GAZL+T7ln/TKBOuihi@fat_crate.local>
References: <20230725082638.956675-1-arnd@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230725082638.956675-1-arnd@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 10:26:13AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> 
> The newly added amd_check_microcode() function has two conflicting definitions
> if CONFIG_CPU_SUP_AMD is enabled and CONFIG_MICROCODE_AMD is disabled. Since
> the header with the stub definition is not included in cpu/amd.c, this only
> causes a -Wmissing-prototype warning with W=1

Can we please promote -Wmissing-prototype to default or is it too noisy
yet?

> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_amd.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_amd.h
> index 9675c621c1ca4..6a860d40b0411 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_amd.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_amd.h
> @@ -48,13 +48,18 @@ extern void __init load_ucode_amd_bsp(unsigned int family);
>  extern void load_ucode_amd_ap(unsigned int family);
>  extern int __init save_microcode_in_initrd_amd(unsigned int family);
>  void reload_ucode_amd(unsigned int cpu);
> -extern void amd_check_microcode(void);
>  #else
>  static inline void __init load_ucode_amd_bsp(unsigned int family) {}
>  static inline void load_ucode_amd_ap(unsigned int family) {}
>  static inline int __init
>  save_microcode_in_initrd_amd(unsigned int family) { return -EINVAL; }
>  static inline void reload_ucode_amd(unsigned int cpu) {}
> +#endif
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_SUP_AMD
> +extern void amd_check_microcode(void);
> +#else
>  static inline void amd_check_microcode(void) {}
>  #endif
> +
>  #endif /* _ASM_X86_MICROCODE_AMD_H */

Considering how cpu/amd.c provides the function implementation, that
header gunk should not be in microcode_amd.h but in ...asm/processor.h,
I'd say.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette