linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] x86/microcode for v6.6-rc1

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: <CAHk-=wjPNoHZm4ukpSXRCpxoCSb59GLgiDZBTgs-yn0=082TFw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 28 Aug 2023 16:09:39 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86/microcode for v6.6-rc1

On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 at 05:25, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>
> please pull the first part of Thomas' microcode loader work, for 6.6.

Bah.

The Zenbleed fix conflicted with this because of how it declared the
amd_check_microcode() function.

The natural way to do it would have been in the new
microcode/internal.h file, but that isn't included by the caller, and
while I could have just done something like

    #include "microcode/internal.h"

in the common.c file, that seemed to be against the spirit here.

So I hacked something up in <asm/microcode.h> instead.

That is probably not what either you or Thomas wanted, but the Intel
code has some similar hacks in that header, so it's not _entirely_ out
of line.

Please just let me know how much I messed up.

I apologize in advance.

                 Linus