[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <84058a7359c55f2af16a85398df85a36@natalenko.name>
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2018 18:01:50 +0200
From: Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
sironi@...zon.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arch/x86: Fix boot_cpu_data.microcode version output
Hi.
On 01.08.2018 17:59, Luck, Tony wrote:
>> There's no reliable way to get the old microcode revision which was
>> overwritten during the upgrade. If dmesg gets overwritten you lose,
>> like
>> in all the other gazillion cases where you lose information due to
>> that.
>
> The primary requirement here is that we report the version of the
> microcode
> in use at the time of a crash. Keeping history of all updates seems to
> me to
> beyond the scope of the kernel's responsibilities.
>
> It's not like these updates appear out of the ether. You have to go out
> and
> grab a new package and install it. User land can keep track of this
> much
> more easily than the kernel.
I don't mind doing the right thing at all. It is just to inform you that
it was found to be useful.
Also, [1].
Thanks ☺.
[1] https://xkcd.com/1172/
--
Oleksandr Natalenko (post-factum)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists