linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86, microcode: Make reload interface per system

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]

Message-ID: <4FE25C7E.9030109@zytor.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:27:58 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
CC:	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, X86-ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86, microcode: Make reload interface per system

On 06/20/2012 04:23 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 04:10:18PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> I'm wondering about the new format... it seems to potentially make it
>> harder to do the proper retaining of compatible CPU microcodes.
> 
> .. and if you don't split the blob, you have all the ucode patches in
> one package. So are there any advantages in splitting the single blob?
> 

Not that I know of.  IMO the driver can, and should, be the one doing
the pruning.

	-hpa

--
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/