linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86/microcode: Support for Intel Staging Feature

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <526df712-6091-4b04-97d5-9007789dc750@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 15:23:53 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Colin Mitchell <colinmitchell@...gle.com>
Cc: chang.seok.bae@...el.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
 x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86/microcode: Support for Intel Staging Feature

On 2/28/25 14:52, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 02:27:15PM -0800, Colin Mitchell wrote:
>> As a potential user, I'd advocate for an option to disable legacy
>> loading if staging is supported.
> What happens if staging is failing indefinitely, for whatever reason?
> 
> You can't load any microcode anymore if you've disabled the legacy method
> too.

Yeah, I'm perplexed by this choice too.

You seem to be saying that you'd rather be (for instance) insecure
running old microcode than have the latency blip from a legacy microcode
load.

What action would you take if a staging-load fails? Retry again a few
times? Go back to the CPU vendor and get a new image? Or just ignore it?