[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b647ffbd0808010425r16db2957i3e7212903a698c19@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 13:25:26 +0200
From: "Dmitry Adamushko" <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>
To: "Peter Oruba" <peter.oruba@....com>,
"Tigran Aivazian" <tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk>
Cc: "Max Krasnyansky" <maxk@...lcomm.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] x86: AMD microcode patch loading v2 fixes
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?
TIA,
--
Best regards,
Dmitry Adamushko
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists