linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/microcode: Fix CPU synchronization routine

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180315010152.GE11061@pd.tnic>
Date:   Thu, 15 Mar 2018 02:01:52 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>
Cc:     X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Emanuel Czirai <xftroxgpx@...tonmail.com>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/microcode: Fix CPU synchronization routine

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 10:00:14PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Intel takes anything from twenty thousand cycles to several *million*
> cycles per core, proportional to microcode update size.

Got any hard data to back that claim up?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.