linux-kernel - Re: [patch V3 23/30] x86/microcode: Provide new control functions

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: <20230927115000.GDZRQW6LLQlUvxzRW1@fat_crate.local>
Date:   Wed, 27 Sep 2023 13:50:00 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
        Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [patch V3 23/30] x86/microcode: Provide new control functions

On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:42:20AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> No. That's two different things. The write above stores the information
> fir the current CPU, while this conditional constructs the command for
> the siblings.

Aha, I was simply pointing out that you're not checking whether the
primary got updated but writing unconditionally SCTRL_DONE for it but
you check ret to know what to do for the *secondaries*.

The actual check whether the primary got updated is the
ucode_ctrl.result check later.

Yeah, that's ok.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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