[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180116205037.lzudhvyymyuxjccu@pd.tnic>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 21:50:37 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc: Jia Zhang <zhang.jia@...ux.alibaba.com>,
"hmh@....eng.br" <hmh@....eng.br>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/microcode/intel: Extend BDW late-loading with LLC
size check
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 12:11:58PM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> I think so. The erratum (see below) says the problem only occurs
> on the large-cache SKUs. So we only need to avoid the update if
> we are on a big cache SKU that is also running old microcode.
... and there's not a more reliable way to detect those like platform ID
or so? Because if for anywhere, this is where one *should* use platform
ID.
Or perhaps some other bit somewhere instead of this cache size thing?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists