linux-kernel - [PATCH v3 03/15] x86/microcode: Update the Intel processor flag scan check

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: <20250219184133.816753-4-sohil.mehta@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 18:41:21 +0000
From: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>
To: x86@...nel.org,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
	Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
	David Laight <david.laight.linux@...il.com>,
	Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com>,
	Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>,
	linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 03/15] x86/microcode: Update the Intel processor flag scan check

The Family model check to read the processor flag MSR is misleading and
potentially incorrect. It doesn't consider Family while comparing the
model number. The original check did have a Family number but it got
lost/moved during refactoring.

intel_collect_cpu_info() is called through multiple paths such as early
initialization, CPU hotplug as well as IFS image load. Some of these
flows would be error prone due to the ambiguous check.

Correct the processor flag scan check to use a Family number and update
it to a VFM based one to make it more readable.

Signed-off-by: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>
Acked-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
---
v3: Picked up Dave's Ack.
v2: Use a VFM check instead of hardcoded numbers.
---
 arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h   | 1 +
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h
index 6d7b04ffc5fd..cccc932d761e 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h
@@ -46,6 +46,7 @@
 #define INTEL_ANY			IFM(X86_FAMILY_ANY, X86_MODEL_ANY)
 
 #define INTEL_PENTIUM_PRO		IFM(6, 0x01)
+#define INTEL_PENTIUM_III_DESCHUTES	IFM(6, 0x05)
 
 #define INTEL_CORE_YONAH		IFM(6, 0x0E)
 
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
index f3d534807d91..819199bc0119 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ void intel_collect_cpu_info(struct cpu_signature *sig)
 	sig->pf = 0;
 	sig->rev = intel_get_microcode_revision();
 
-	if (x86_model(sig->sig) >= 5 || x86_family(sig->sig) > 6) {
+	if (IFM(x86_family(sig->sig), x86_model(sig->sig)) >= INTEL_PENTIUM_III_DESCHUTES) {
 		unsigned int val[2];
 
 		/* get processor flags from MSR 0x17 */
-- 
2.43.0