[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y2Tw2+LCmZe8XBJn@zn.tnic>
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 12:00:43 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
X86-kernel <x86@...nel.org>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Jacon Jun Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
Subject: Re: [v2 01/13] x86/microcode/intel: Prevent printing updated
microcode rev multiple times
On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 05:58:49PM +0000, Ashok Raj wrote:
> @@ -696,8 +697,7 @@ static int collect_cpu_info(int cpu_num, struct cpu_signature *csig)
>
> csig->rev = c->microcode;
>
> - /* No extra locking on prev, races are harmless. */
> - if (csig->sig != prev.sig || csig->pf != prev.pf || csig->rev != prev.rev) {
> + if (bsp && csig->rev != prev.rev) {
This basically means that the loader is not going to support mixed
steppings microcode.
Yes, no?
If yes, can I remove the patch cache too and use a single buffer for the
current patch?
That would simplify things even more.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists