linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/14] x86/microcode/intel: Expose microcode_sanity

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: <4ee6073a-461e-562d-5c00-d1b371288b63@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 4 Nov 2022 15:02:42 -0700
From:   "Joseph, Jithu" <jithu.joseph@...el.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:     <hdegoede@...hat.com>, <markgross@...nel.org>,
        <tglx@...utronix.de>, <mingo@...hat.com>,
        <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, <x86@...nel.org>, <hpa@...or.com>,
        <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        <tony.luck@...el.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>, <patches@...ts.linux.dev>,
        <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>, <thiago.macieira@...el.com>,
        <athenas.jimenez.gonzalez@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/14] x86/microcode/intel: Expose
 microcode_sanity_check()



On 11/4/2022 3:50 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> As to patch 8, that metadata checking should not be part of
> microcode_intel_sanity_check() but a separate function. Along with
> microcode_intel_find_meta_data() - all those should go into the IFS
> thing.
> 
> When microcode loading ends up really needing metadata, *then*
> that functionality should be lifted into a more fitting place like
> cpu/intel.c

Thanks for the pointer. I will move the microcode_intel_find_meta_data()
function into IFS driver and also drop the metadata checking from the exported
microcode_intel_sanity_check()

Wanted to check with you, if it is okay to rename the first "reserved" field
in microcode_header_intel to "metasize"  today (as shown in the diff below)
or would you prefer to do that too at a later point ? (doing so today will help to
avoid redefining an IFS specific header struct, with this as the only change )


diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_intel.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_intel.h
index a4d2ed43193c..bec23c11ca52 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_intel.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_intel.h
@@ -14,7 +14,8 @@ struct microcode_header_intel {
        unsigned int            pf;
        unsigned int            datasize;
        unsigned int            totalsize;
-       unsigned int            reserved[3];
+       unsigned int            metasize;
+       unsigned int            reserved[2];
 };


Jithu