| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <5265395C.2040807@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 10:25:32 -0400 From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com> To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.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 10/21/2013 08:32 AM, Ming Lei wrote: > 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? The code as it is _currently_ written does not use uevents to load the processor firmware. ie) call_usermodehelper does not need uevent to get notified, so I think FW_ACTION_NOHOTPLUG is correct. P. -- 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