[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b2e6674e-eff7-4883-b1a2-9eb1e32c8247@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2025 10:53:11 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com>, Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "x86@...nel.org"
<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>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com>,
Alex Murray <alex.murray@...onical.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"stable@...nel.org" <stable@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Old microcode CPU matching issue - x86/microcode/intel: Refresh
the revisions that determine old_microcode
I think this is a platform mismatch problem. The microcode file for
06-8f-08 has two different versions for two different platforms:
$ iucode-tool --list-all intel-ucode/06-8f-08
...
sig 0x000806f8, pf_mask 0x10, 2025-04-08, rev 0x2c000401
...
sig 0x000806f8, pf_mask 0x87, 2025-04-04, rev 0x2b000643
Note the pf_mask and rev deltas here: ^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^
I guess we'll need to take those into consideration, both adding pf_mask to
the match list and actually matching on it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists