[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50D25464.6040007@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 15:57:24 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Jacob Shin <jacob.shin@....com>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@...citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/microcode] x86/microcode_intel_early.c: Early update
ucode on Intel's CPU
On 12/19/2012 03:55 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 03:50:14PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> We are trying to discuss mitigation strategies with you, but you
>> haven't really given us any useful information, e.g. what happens near
>> the various boundaries of the hole, what could trigger prefeching into
>> the range, and what it would take to fix the BIOSes.
>
> Another thing we could do (I admit it is ugly) is to add a quirk to the
> #MC handler and detect that specific condition by looking at the address
> reported in MCi_ADDR and exit early by not panicking the system.
>
> Again, this is ugly but a possibility, still.
>
I would really, really hate to have to deal with an early MCE handler, too.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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