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: <YwkAaP4O0fospJyI@araj-dh-work>
Date:   Fri, 26 Aug 2022 17:18:32 +0000
From:   Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:     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>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] x86/microcode/intel: Check against CPU signature
 before saving microcode

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 06:24:02PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 03:27:57AM +0000, Ashok Raj wrote:
> > Old patch header rev is fms3
> > New patch header is fms2
> > Your CPU sig is fms2.
> 
> Can you pls give me exact reproduction instructions how you come to this
> situation? 

Sure, the problem is that code base is something I *never* wanted to post,
since its not architectural.

The hard part is to split some of the internal code out and have a plain
version on public tree that can reproduce. 

You may need additional hackery since you won't have the additional
revisions for testing. I'll try to hack something up

Cheers,
Ashok