linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/microcode/intel: Refresh the revisions that determine old

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250819051940.sqdjdvwupvocuf7w@desk>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2025 22:19:40 -0700
From: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>
To: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
	Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com>,
	Alex Murray <alex.murray@...onical.com>,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/microcode/intel: Refresh the revisions that
 determine old_microcode

On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 12:01:36PM -0700, Sohil Mehta wrote:
> Update the minimum expected revisions of Intel microcode based on the
> microcode-20250512 (May 2025) release.
> 
> Cc: <stable@...nel.org> # v6.15+
> Signed-off-by: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>
> ---
>  .../kernel/cpu/microcode/intel-ucode-defs.h   | 86 +++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel-ucode-defs.h b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel-ucode-defs.h
> index cb6e601701ab..2d48e6593540 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel-ucode-defs.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel-ucode-defs.h
> @@ -67,9 +67,8 @@
>  { .flags = X86_CPU_ID_FLAG_ENTRY_VALID, .vendor = X86_VENDOR_INTEL, .family = 0x6,  .model = 0x55, .steppings = 0x0008, .driver_data = 0x1000191 },
>  { .flags = X86_CPU_ID_FLAG_ENTRY_VALID, .vendor = X86_VENDOR_INTEL, .family = 0x6,  .model = 0x55, .steppings = 0x0010, .driver_data = 0x2007006 },
>  { .flags = X86_CPU_ID_FLAG_ENTRY_VALID, .vendor = X86_VENDOR_INTEL, .family = 0x6,  .model = 0x55, .steppings = 0x0020, .driver_data = 0x3000010 },
> -{ .flags = X86_CPU_ID_FLAG_ENTRY_VALID, .vendor = X86_VENDOR_INTEL, .family = 0x6,  .model = 0x55, .steppings = 0x0040, .driver_data = 0x4003605 },

".model = 0x55, .steppings = 0x0040" is being removed? Total number of
entries in the table are being reduced by ~10.

> -{ .flags = X86_CPU_ID_FLAG_ENTRY_VALID, .vendor = X86_VENDOR_INTEL, .family = 0x6,  .model = 0x55, .steppings = 0x0080, .driver_data = 0x5003707 },
> -{ .flags = X86_CPU_ID_FLAG_ENTRY_VALID, .vendor = X86_VENDOR_INTEL, .family = 0x6,  .model = 0x55, .steppings = 0x0800, .driver_data = 0x7002904 },
> +{ .flags = X86_CPU_ID_FLAG_ENTRY_VALID, .vendor = X86_VENDOR_INTEL, .family = 0x6,  .model = 0x55, .steppings = 0x0080, .driver_data = 0x5003901 },
> +{ .flags = X86_CPU_ID_FLAG_ENTRY_VALID, .vendor = X86_VENDOR_INTEL, .family = 0x6,  .model = 0x55, .steppings = 0x0800, .driver_data = 0x7002b01 },
>  { .flags = X86_CPU_ID_FLAG_ENTRY_VALID, .vendor = X86_VENDOR_INTEL, .family = 0x6,  .model = 0x56, .steppings = 0x0004, .driver_data = 0x1c },
>  { .flags = X86_CPU_ID_FLAG_ENTRY_VALID, .vendor = X86_VENDOR_INTEL, .family = 0x6,  .model = 0x56, .steppings = 0x0008, .driver_data = 0x700001c },
>  { .flags = X86_CPU_ID_FLAG_ENTRY_VALID, .vendor = X86_VENDOR_INTEL, .family = 0x6,  .model = 0x56, .steppings = 0x0010, .driver_data = 0xf00001a },
> @@ -81,51 +80,62 @@