[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87d34r5n4f.fsf@spindle.srvr.nix>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 17:26:24 +0100
From: Nix <nix@...eri.org.uk>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>,
"Yu\, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, X86-ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, 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 20 Jun 2012, Borislav Petkov uttered the following:
> I know, right. Whose idea was it to do it like that I don't know.
> AFAICT, Intel delivers ucode as a single blob too, so why split it? The
> driver picks out the right blob anyway.
Only if supplied over the old interface. Over the new interface,
we just see
microcode: error! Bad data in microcode data file
in the log. So clearly the driver doesn't know how to split up the
microcode.bin that Intel provides, and (until Henrique's iucode-tool or
something like it becomes ubiquitous) the old interface, and
microcode_ctl, cannot be removed.
--
NULL && (void)
--
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