[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <06991931-9f04-49fc-9ef7-ba23384aeb32@email.android.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 11:48:25 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BUG: early intel microcode update violating alignment rules
I don't think so. I wouldn't count on that in the long run.
I'm having some discussions about this integrally at the moment.
On August 11, 2014 11:18:32 AM PDT, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br> wrote:
>On Mon, Aug 11, 2014, at 11:51, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> We could put a buffer in the initdata region (we really could use an
>> initbss region!) or in the brk.
>
>That sounds much better than the hideous crap I came up with. The
>buffer would need to be at least 64KiB in size to be on the safe side.
>The largest public microcode update ATM is 23KiB.
>
>I am not sure if we might need more than 64KiB: the Intel SDM mentions
>that in real mode the update data must not cross a segment boundary,
>and
>also must not exceed a segment limit. I am a bit rusty on real mode,
>but doesn't that mean, in practice, that microcode update data size is
>limited in size to 64KiB?
--
Sent from my mobile phone. Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.
--
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