On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 12:18:24PM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
src/vendorcode/amd/agesa/f12/Proc/CPU/Family/0x10/RevE /F10MicrocodePatch010000bf.c
- I do not understand the commit message. What do you mean with patch
file? In this patch you are only adding a header file.
It is adding microcode patches to a header file.
The lines added contain binary patches for a binary "interpreter/program/something" stored in the CPU that is called microcode. Roughly, there's some kind of EPROM (or ROM+shadow RAM or some form of memory) in the CPU that gets indexed by x86 opcodes and other inputs and outputs control signals to drive the CPU circuitry in a way consistent with the instruction set semantics and CPU specification. The information in this EPROM is the microcode. The content in the altered "source" file is not a new copy of the microcode but just parts of it presumably with some control information about which version it is or which it should replace and where to apply the code portions, or whatever. That's why the original file had MicrocodePatch in its name.
I don't know many more details, since neither the microcode source, the language it is written in or the CPU design are public at all, but I think it is enough to understand why QingPei Wang called it "patch file". You can't say "I add microcode for revision E Fam 10 CPUs" because the file does not contain the whole microcode of the CPU, just some (small?) modifications to the microcode contained in the CPU as shipped from factory. "patch file" is not talking of a patch to the coreboot code, but of a patch to the microcode, the whole binary patch will be contained in the coreboot image if you so compile it. Call the patch set sent "metapatch" if you like.
I agree that initial capital case is clearer, although I don't see it so important as to raise it.
The only reason I can imagine for not taking the patch set (updated later) is lack of extensive tests or license compatibility, but both would apply to microcode already in coreboot so my guess is it'll be merged.
Thanks for reviewing contributions. And thanks to contributors.