From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758781Ab3LFVEO (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Dec 2013 16:04:14 -0500 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:28043 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758759Ab3LFVEM (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Dec 2013 16:04:12 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,842,1378882800"; d="scan'208";a="439941161" From: Andi Kleen To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: x86@kernel.org, Andi Kleen Subject: [PATCH 1/2] x86, microcode: Do Intel microcode revision check signed Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 13:04:02 -0800 Message-Id: <1386363843-32530-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.8.3.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Andi Kleen The Intel SDM Vol 3 9.11.1 Microcode update states that the update revision field is signed. However we do the comparison unsigned, as the comparison gets promoted. Use a cast to really do a signed comparison of the microcode revision. Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen --- arch/x86/kernel/microcode_intel_lib.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_intel_lib.c b/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_intel_lib.c index ce69320..68503d1 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_intel_lib.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_intel_lib.c @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ update_match_cpu(unsigned int csig, unsigned int cpf, int update_match_revision(struct microcode_header_intel *mc_header, int rev) { - return (mc_header->rev <= rev) ? 0 : 1; + return ((int)mc_header->rev <= rev) ? 0 : 1; } int microcode_sanity_check(void *mc, int print_err) -- 1.8.3.1