linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] arch/x86: Fix boot_cpu

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:   Wed, 01 Aug 2018 18:01:50 +0200
From:   Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>
To:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
        linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        sironi@...zon.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arch/x86: Fix boot_cpu_data.microcode version output

Hi.

On 01.08.2018 17:59, Luck, Tony wrote:
>> There's no reliable way to get the old microcode revision which was
>> overwritten during the upgrade. If dmesg gets overwritten you lose, 
>> like
>> in all the other gazillion cases where you lose information due to 
>> that.
> 
> The primary requirement here is that we report the version of the 
> microcode
> in use at the time of a crash. Keeping history of all updates seems to 
> me to
> beyond the scope of the kernel's responsibilities.
> 
> It's not like these updates appear out of the ether. You have to go out 
> and
> grab a new package and install it.  User land can keep track of this 
> much
> more easily than the kernel.

I don't mind doing the right thing at all. It is just to inform you that 
it was found to be useful.

Also, [1].

Thanks ☺.

[1] https://xkcd.com/1172/

-- 
   Oleksandr Natalenko (post-factum)