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: <Y8mFBbWmpGvZy9dB@a4bf019067fa.jf.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 19 Jan 2023 09:59:33 -0800
From:   Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
To:     "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
CC:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "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>,
        "Ashok Raj" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>, <mpohlack@...zon.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] x86/microcode/intel: Print when early microcode
 loading fails

Hi Boris,

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 12:58:12PM -0800, Tony Luck wrote:
> > 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.
> 
If this is the one blocking this series, as Tony proposed, its not worth
loosing sleep over this.

Would you recommend resubmitting a new set with the fixes for the interim
patch compile failures (for 32bit) and drop this last patch?

If you have any other comments would be great to hear now before I repost a
new series to capture everything that's need to be addressed.

As always you can change commit logs to your satisfaction, I try, but its
still not as perfect as how you like to see them.

Cheers,
Ashok

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ