linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/microcode: Add a "microcode=" command line option

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]

Date:   Fri, 9 Jun 2023 14:28:28 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Cc:     X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/microcode: Add a "microcode=" command line option

On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 06:55:39PM -0700, Ashok Raj wrote:
> When end user changes the behavior, isn't it against the design
> specification? And if so, should that result in kernel being tainted
> after a reload?

That's a chicken bit and should not be used usually. I'm adding it just
in case.

> Is this reload on all threads required by all models, or only certain
> models? I was wondering if the forced reload could be limited to only
> affected CPUs instead of doing it on all unconditionally.

Unconditionally.

> Shouldn't the "control" be under LATE_LOADING? Since this only controls
> late-loading behavior?

No, that's a bitfield and is going to be used for other flags, if
needed and which are not necessarily late-loading related.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette