[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FE4B796.3050009@zytor.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 11:21:10 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Nix <nix@...eri.org.uk>
CC: Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>,
"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 06/22/2012 09:26 AM, Nix wrote:
> 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.
>
Even more importantly, to do early microcode updates we need to stash
away not just the current CPU's microcode but any compatible CPU's
microcode, so just loading a single one is not going to work...
Oif.
-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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists