Re: [PATCH 00/16] x86/cpu: Cleanup for NX adjustments

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 27/01/2026 11:23 am, Teddy Astie wrote:
> Le 26/01/2026 à 18:56, Andrew Cooper a écrit :
>> I was hoping this to be a patch or two, but it got out of hand...
>>
>> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen-staging/-/pipelines/2287078891
>> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen-staging/-/commits/andrew/nx
>>
>> The branch has one extra patch to fake up the firmware settings being set to
>> Gitlab CI, not included in this series.
>>
>> Julien: This ought to suitable to rebase your cleanup on to.  In the end, I
>> did the AMD adjustment mostly because I needed it to test the correctness of
>> the prior cleanup.
>>
>> The final 4 patches are tangential cleanup which I've kept out of the prior
>> work in case we wish to backport it.  Everything prior is relevant to
>> untangling, and mostly for the benefit of the AMD side.
>>
>> The early patches are hopefully non-controvertial.  Later patches are a 
>> little
>> more RFC, and in need of further testing.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
> Tested on a Intel machine with "DEP" disabled, and "Require NX support" 
> disabled, I get a pagefault in hpet code

>From above:

> Julien: This ought to suitable to rebase your cleanup on to.

This is cleanup only.  I've not got the bugfixes for EFI boot yet, so
the behaviour you see is still expected for now.

Although, thinking about it, it might be better if I try to merge the
two series, so everyone can test the end result.

Thoughts?

>> (XEN) Xen version 4.22-unstable (tsnake41@(none)) (gcc (Alpine 15.2.0) 
>> 15.2.0) debug=y Tue Jan 27 12:06:46 CET 2026
>> (XEN) Latest ChangeSet: Mon Jan 26 17:53:45 2026 +0000 git:6491616ddd
>> (XEN) build-id: 035024497a4cadebf9e5a2ded61f63ac
>> (XEN) re-enabled NX (Execute Disable) protection
>> (XEN) CPU Vendor: Intel, Family 6 (0x6), Model 60 (0x3c), Stepping 3 (raw 
>> 000306c3)
>> (XEN) BSP microcode revision: 0x0000001a
>> (XEN) microcode: Bad data in container
>> (XEN) Microcode: Parse error -22

As a tangent, what's going on here?

This is the first time I've seen the error outside of my own testing. 
Is it a container you expect to be good, or some leftovers on a test
machine?

~Andrew