linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] intel_microcode, Fix long microcode load time when firmware file is missing

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: <CACVXFVOqM6BLv914G-PHyYXZR4-wqgosdLUiF=KuESx2+8UQ2A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 21 Oct 2013 20:32:52 +0800
From:	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
To:	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	x86@...nel.org, herrmann.der.user@...glemail.com,
	tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] intel_microcode, Fix long microcode load time when
 firmware file is missing

On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>> And why don't you pass FW_ACTION_HOTPLUG? and you are sure
>> that udev isn't required to handle your microcode update request?
>>
>
> AFAICT in both cases, udev wasn't required to handle the cpu microcode update.
> Both drivers use CMH to load the firmware which removes the need for udev to do
> anything.  Admittedly maybe I've missed some odd use case but I don't think it
> is necessary.

OK, so I guess the CMH still need uevent to get notified, right?

If yes, you should take FW_ACTION_HOTPLUG.


Thanks,
--
Ming Lei
--
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/