Re: cpuctl(formely devcpu) patch test request

On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 16:04:09 +0300
Kostik Belousov <kostikbel_at_gmail.com> mentioned:

> I noted cpucontrol(8) only after trying to import the rev5 patch.
> I do not suggest changing it, but what are the reasons for the microcode
> patch headers definitions to be private for the cpucontrol, instead of
> being put into the machine/<somefile>.h ?
> 

I don't think it'll be generally useful. It's just a format
that vendors use to distribute firmware. Furthermore, it's
only documented by intel.

If something else will requres it, we can always move these
definitions to appropriate header files.

-- 
Stanislav Sedov
ST4096-RIPE