linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v4 6/6] x86/microcode/intel: Print when early microcode loading fails

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: <IA1PR11MB6076660471E9C688E79A2B20FCC69@IA1PR11MB6076.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Tue, 17 Jan 2023 20:58:12 +0000
From:   "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:     "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:     "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        X86-kernel <x86@...nel.org>,
        LKML Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "Schofield, Alison" <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
        "Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 6/6] x86/microcode/intel: Print when early microcode
 loading fails

> If there is no microcode, we don't print anything. So what's loaded in the
> CPU is the latest version. When we have something we can always tell if its
> successful or not.
>
> Its not a microcode file in initrd, but a matching microcode to load. If
> none is found, nothing to worry about.
>
> We just agreed to show both failed and success for late-load. Doing this is
> consistent with that isn't it?
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Y7iYLbEJSYnVn+dW@zn.tnic/
>
> Ingo's:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Y7k9DNz%2F%2FvqBAvZK@gmail.com/
>
> Should we treat early loading differently?

Getting a better set of messages from early microcode update would
be a "nice-to-have" feature. But if there is no agreement on what those
messages should look like, perhaps just skip this part for now.

Then Ashok can move on to the real issue of allowing LATE_LOAD for a
microcode that supports the new "minrev" header field.

-Tony