linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] x86/microcode: support for microcode update in Xen dom0

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: <je07nb$m1l$1@dough.gmane.org>
Date:	Wed, 04 Jan 2012 01:49:49 +0100
From:	Sven Köhler <sven.koehler@...il.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] x86/microcode: support for microcode update in Xen
 dom0

Am 13.10.2011 09:00, schrieb Borislav Petkov:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 08:03:50PM -0400, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 10/12/2011 05:00 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>>
>>> Presumably we'd want some way to make all possible microcode files
>>> available to the hypervisor/kernel so that there's no need to construct
>>> the bootloader config for a specific CPU vendor (or worse, CPU model).
>>> So that would need either some way of specifying multiple files, or a
>>> wrapper which can contain multiple files?
>>>
>>
>> I have been thinking a "bundle" format with a per-vendor header followed 
>> by the microcode in the appropriate format for each vendor.
> 
> Yes, makes sense. Keep it as simple as possible.

For the majority of the past 10 years, the microcode has been shipped as
one big file (at least for intel).
So have you looked at the file format of the bundles that already exist?

--
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/