[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <569E2F5C.2040904@suse.cz>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 13:43:08 +0100
From: Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>
To: Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
Thomas Voegtle <tv@...96.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] CONFIG_FORCE_MINIMALLY_SANE_CONFIG=y
Dne 19.1.2016 v 13:29 Måns Rullgård napsal(a):
> Force-enabling BLK_DEV_INITRD isn't going to make anyone change their
> boot scripts.
If you are on a regular distro, /sbin/installkernel should do the right
thing: Run mkinitrd / dracut and if the tools are recent enough and
there is a microcode update for your CPU, a cpio with the microcode blob
will be prepended to the initrd. So this is more or less covered.
> I'd also like to get a coherent answer to why microcode update is
> preferably done from an initrd as opposed to shortly after mounting
> a regular disk. My systems seem perfectly happy doing the latter.
It's not even done *from* the initrd but way earlier. We learned the
hard way when Intel released a microcode update for Haswell which
disabled TSX: Userspace did not expect the feature flags to change and
previously valid instructions to start trapping. This can in principle
happen again and with any vendor.
Michal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists