From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Jia Zhang <zhang.jia@linux.alibaba.com>,
"hmh@hmh.eng.br" <hmh@hmh.eng.br>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/microcode/intel: Extend BDW late-loading with LLC size check
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 21:01:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180116200149.zffwdbjwj53ba7oj@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F7B333F37@FMSMSX154.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 05:24:27PM +0000, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > I'll look for someone who can confirm the 2.5MB/core detail.
>
> Ok ... re-read the erratum. The 2.5MB/core is clear. The E5+E7 is clear.
>
> No mention of the platform ID, but Jia is dropping that part.
>
> Boris ... what specific questions remain?
This magic:
llc_size_per_core(c) > 2621440
as a reliable detection characteristic whether the patch is good to
apply late. There must be a more reliable way to detect that.
Also, the testing order is:
llc_size_per_core(c) > 2621440 &&
c->microcode < 0x0b000021) {
so if the LLC size per core check fails, the microcode revision being <
0x0b000021 doesn't matter. I.e., on machines with LLC-per-core < 2.5M,
we can update even with revisions < 0x0b000021.
Is that ordering correct?
Also, this heuristic is not documented in the public doc AFAICT - I'm
guessing that'll change soon...?
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-16 20:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-15 13:11 Jia Zhang
2018-01-15 18:46 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-01-16 1:14 ` Jia Zhang
2018-01-16 14:59 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-01-16 17:02 ` Luck, Tony
2018-01-16 17:24 ` Luck, Tony
2018-01-16 20:01 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2018-01-16 20:11 ` Luck, Tony
2018-01-16 20:50 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-01-16 21:30 ` Luck, Tony
2018-01-16 21:51 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-01-19 0:27 ` Jia Zhang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180116200149.zffwdbjwj53ba7oj@pd.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hmh@hmh.eng.br \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=zhang.jia@linux.alibaba.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®