[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140925085158.GF22317@nazgul.tnic>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 10:51:58 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>
Cc: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert.lkml@...il.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: x86, microcode: BUG: microcode update that changes x86_capability
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 11:56:58AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> I don't know about AMD, but on Intel, the time it takes to update the
> microcode on a core is anything but negligible[1], so the microcode
> version skew window still exists, and it is not small. It is much smaller
> than it once was, but it is still there.
I think that window is unsafe but yeah, we probably should take your
empirical observation as good enough for now.
> But IMHO we still need to detect and do something smart when
> x86_capability changes due to a microcode update.
>
> And I'd really prefer it to be "update x86_capability, warn the user and
> carry on" for anything that is not going to crash the kernel.
The problem is with hiding CPUID bits and userspace using HLE after
having detected it previously. I think we'll be on the safe side if we
reboot thus the suggestion to the user that rebooting should be done
ASAP.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
--
--
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