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: <ee722f10-ea30-56a5-6efa-6b3c82a72d8f@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Jul 2018 13:53:50 -0400
From:   Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
To:     bp@...en8.de
Cc:     linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        sironi@...zon.de, tony.luck@...el.com, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch/x86: Fix boot_cpu_data.microcode version output



On 07/30/2018 01:49 PM, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> On systems where a runtime microcode update has occurred the microcode
> version output in a MCE log record is wrong because
> boot_cpu_data.microcode is not updated during runtime.
> 
> Update boot_cpu_data.microcode when the BSP's microcode is updated.
> 
> Fixes: fa94d0c6e0f3 ("x86/MCE: Save microcode revision in machine check records")
> Suggested-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.com>
> Signed-off-by: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Cc: sironi@...zon.de
> Cc: tony.luck@...el.com
> ---
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c   | 4 ++++
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 4 ++++
>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> index 0624957aa068..7f5b32535ac7 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c
> @@ -537,6 +537,10 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_amd(int cpu)
>  	uci->cpu_sig.rev = mc_amd->hdr.patch_id;
>  	c->microcode = mc_amd->hdr.patch_id;
>  
> +	/* Update boot_cpu_data's revision too, if we're on the BSP: */
> +	if (c->cpu_index == boot_cpu_data.cpu_index)
> +		boot_cpu_data.microcode = rev;
> +

Borislav, hold off on this.  I want to double check something with AMD.

I think this has to be

	boot_cpu_data.microcode = mc_amd->hdr.patch_id;

I'm going to grab some old/new microcode and test.  I do know that the Intel
update below works.

P.

>  	return UCODE_UPDATED;
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> index 97ccf4c3b45b..256d336cbc04 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
> @@ -851,6 +851,10 @@ static enum ucode_state apply_microcode_intel(int cpu)
>  	uci->cpu_sig.rev = rev;
>  	c->microcode = rev;
>  
> +	/* Update boot_cpu_data's revision too, if we're on the BSP: */
> +	if (c->cpu_index == boot_cpu_data.cpu_index)
> +		boot_cpu_data.microcode = rev;
> +
>  	return UCODE_UPDATED;
>  }
>  
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ