[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <41cee473-321c-2758-032a-ccf0f01359dc@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 18:06:54 -0400
From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Cc: Mihai Carabas <mihai.carabas@...cle.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Jon Grimm <Jon.Grimm@....com>, kanth.ghatraju@...cle.com,
konrad.wilk@...cle.com, patrick.colp@...cle.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/microcode: Add an option to reload microcode even if
revision is unchanged
On 9/3/19 12:46 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
>
> @@ -629,8 +639,12 @@ static ssize_t reload_store(struct device *dev,
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - if (val != 1)
> + if (val == 2) {
> + add_taint(TAINT_CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC, LOCKDEP_STILL_OK);
Why do we need to taint kernel here? We are not making any changes.
> + return microcode_reload_late(apply_microcode_nocheck);
> + } else if (val != 1) {
> return size;
> + }
>
> tmp_ret = microcode_ops->request_microcode_fw(bsp, µcode_pdev->dev, true);
This won't allow people to load from new microcode blob which I thought
was one of the objectives behind this new feature.
-boris
Powered by blists - more mailing lists