Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] x86/CPU/AMD: Print AGESA string from DMI additional information entry

From: Mario Limonciello (AMD) (kernel.org)

Date: Wed Jan 21 2026 - 17:06:37 EST




On 1/21/2026 3:30 PM, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 02:50:49PM -0600, Mario Limonciello wrote:
On 1/21/26 8:26 AM, Yazen Ghannam wrote:

[...]

+ do {
+ struct dmi_a_info_entry *entry;
+ const char *string_ptr;
+
+ entry = (struct dmi_a_info_entry *)next;
+
+ /*
+ * Not much can be done to validate data. At least the entry
+ * length shouldn't be 0.
+ */
+ if (!entry->length)
+ return;
+
+ string_ptr = dmi_string_nosave(&info->header, entry->str_num);
+
+ /* Only one AGESA string is expected. */
+ if (!strncmp(string_ptr, "AGESA", 5)) {
+ pr_info("%s\n", string_ptr);
+ break;
+ }
+

[...]

+static inline const char *
+ dmi_string_nosave(const struct dmi_header *dm, u8 s) { return dmi_empty_string; }

The dmi_empty_string needs to be moved to this header file from
dmi_scan.c.

Otherwise, there's a build issue as the test bot reported.

Thanks,
Yazen

I don't think it's actually appropriate to move dmi_empty_string in this
case. It's a static variable, shouldn't really be in a header.

I would think it's better to just return NULL.

dmi_string_nosave() should always return a string. The callers expect
it. That's why we don't need a NULL pointer check above.

+static inline const char *
+ dmi_string_nosave(const struct dmi_header *dm, u8 s) { return ""; }

Rather than move the variable, just return the empty string directly.

Thanks,
Yazen

Got it; thanks for clarifying.