linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86 microcode: don't check the size

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]

Message-Id: <1157606077.2782.58.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com>
Date:	Thu, 07 Sep 2006 13:14:37 +0800
From:	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
To:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Tigran Aivazian <tigran@...itas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 microcode: don't check the size

On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 00:18 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Shaohua Li wrote:
> > IA32 manual says if micorcode update's size is 0, then the size is
> > default size (2048 bytes). But this doesn't suggest all microcode
> > update's size should be above 2048 bytes to me. We actually had a
> > microcode update whose size is 1024 bytes. The patch just removed the
> > check.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
> 
> Why not explicitly check for zero, rather than removing the questionable 
> less-than test?  The default size logic hasn't disappeared...
We just don't want the default size check. If the size is 0, we still
need use default size. The patch is just for those whose size isn't 0
but smaller than default size.

Thanks,
Shaohua
-
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/