linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86, microcode: Correct microcode revision format

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

Date:	Tue, 18 Oct 2011 09:51:45 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	X86-ML <x86@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86, microcode: Correct microcode revision format

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 02:50:27AM -0400, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2011, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
> > index 8af6fa4..ad8d897 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
> > @@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ static void print_mce(struct mce *m)
> >  	 * Note this output is parsed by external tools and old fields
> >  	 * should not be changed.
> >  	 */
> > -	pr_emerg(HW_ERR "PROCESSOR %u:%x TIME %llu SOCKET %u APIC %x microcode %u\n",
> > +	pr_emerg(HW_ERR "PROCESSOR %u:%x TIME %llu SOCKET %u APIC %x microcode %x\n",
> >  		m->cpuvendor, m->cpuid, m->time, m->socketid, m->apicid,
> >  		cpu_data(m->extcpu).microcode);
> >  
> 
> Any reason why this isn't prefixed with "0x"?

Well, no strong reason except that APIC is without '0x' and I leaned
towards the same for 'microcode'. And since this output format is legacy
and MCE stanzas are being parsed by scripts, keeping the format for new
fields sounded like the right thing to do, IMHO.

> 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/proc.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/proc.c
> > index 6254fda..14b2314 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/proc.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/proc.c
> > @@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ static int show_cpuinfo(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
> >  	else
> >  		seq_printf(m, "stepping\t: unknown\n");
> >  	if (c->microcode)
> > -		seq_printf(m, "microcode\t: %u\n", c->microcode);
> > +		seq_printf(m, "microcode\t: 0x%x\n", c->microcode);
> >  
> >  	if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_TSC)) {
> >  		unsigned int freq = cpufreq_quick_get(cpu);
> 
> When here it is?

This needed to explicitly state that it is a hex number because the rest
of the /proc/cpuinfo fields are decimals.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551
--
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/