linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] x86/microcode/intel: Check against CPU signature before saving microcode

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: <YvycC5cwBKJFgefV@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Aug 2022 09:43:07 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        LKML Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        X86-kernel <x86@...nel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        Jacon Jun Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] x86/microcode/intel: Check against CPU signature
 before saving microcode


* Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com> wrote:

> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org

Not sure the series justifies stable - there's like a ton of things that 
could go wrong with a series like this & we want to have some serious 
testing first.

>  	list_for_each_entry_safe(iter, tmp, &microcode_cache, plist) {
>  		mc_saved_hdr = (struct microcode_header_intel *)iter->data;
> -		sig	     = mc_saved_hdr->sig;
> -		pf	     = mc_saved_hdr->pf;
>  
> -		if (find_matching_signature(data, sig, pf)) {
> +		sig = uci->cpu_sig.sig;
> +		pf  = uci->cpu_sig.pf;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * Compare the current CPUs signature with the ones in the

s/CPUs
 /CPU's

Thanks,

	Ingo