linux-kernel - Re: [patch 0/4] x86: AMD microcode patch loading v2 fixes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 01 Aug 2008 08:26:19 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>
CC:	Peter Oruba <peter.oruba@....com>,
	Tigran Aivazian <tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk>,
	Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] x86: AMD microcode patch loading v2 fixes

Dmitry Adamushko wrote:
> Tigran, Peter,
> 
> may a firmware package contain a few 'microcode' updates for a specific cpu?
> 
> And if so, does each of them provide independent 'errata' fixes? [*]
> 
> (or they are just different versions of the same self-consistent/full
> 'microcode' update and we may need to apply each of them just e.g.
> because we can't jump from stepping X.1 to X.3 without applying X.2 in
> between?
> 
> if it's [1], then I wonder why only a single 'microcode' update (which
> has been previously cached in 'uci->mc') is being applied for the case
> of system-wide resume (apply_microcode_check_cpu()). Don't we need to
> go through the full cpu_request_microcode() cycle to consider all
> updates?
> 

No, there is only ever one microcode; you only run the latest one.

	-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/