From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: "Pontes, Otavio" <otavio.pontes@intel.com>
Cc: "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/microcode: Check for offline CPUs before checking for microcode update
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 15:55:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210320145546.GC3338@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <MW3PR11MB45559DAC0B495A4262C9121BF8689@MW3PR11MB4555.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 06:48:14PM +0000, Pontes, Otavio wrote:
> Turn off one core (2 threads)
> $ echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/online
> $ echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/online
>
> Install the ucode fails because there's one core off
> $ cp intel-ucode/06-8e-09 /lib/firmware/intel-ucode/
> $ echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/microcode/reload
> bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument
>
> Turn the core back on
> $ echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/online
> $ echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/online
> $ cat /proc/cpuinfo |grep microcode
> microcode : 0x30
> microcode : 0xde
> microcode : 0x30
> microcode : 0xde
Yeah, I'm looking at that check_online_cpus() thing and wondering why we
even need that:
0. So you have CPUs 1 and 3 offline.
1. We can update on the subset of cores which are online
2. If a core is offline and comes online, we have the hotplug notifier:
cpuhp_setup_state_nocalls(CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN, "x86/microcode:online",
mc_cpu_online, mc_cpu_down_prep);
which takes care of updating the microcode when that CPU comes online.
So unless your microcode folks don't come back with a real requirement
why all CPUs must absolutely be online for a late update, then the
proper fix is to get rid of check_online_cpus() altogether and update
what's online and the rest will get updated when they come online.
I know Ashok did:
commit 30ec26da9967d0d785abc24073129a34c3211777
Author: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Date: Wed Feb 28 11:28:43 2018 +0100
x86/microcode: Do not upload microcode if CPUs are offline
Avoid loading microcode if any of the CPUs are offline, and issue a
warning. Having different microcode revisions on the system at any time
is outright dangerous.
but those cores are offlined so they're executing some idle routine...
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-20 14:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20210319165515.9240-1-otavio.pontes@intel.com>
[not found] ` <20210319165515.9240-2-otavio.pontes@intel.com>
2021-03-19 18:48 ` Pontes, Otavio
2021-03-20 14:55 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2021-03-21 4:56 ` Raj, Ashok
2021-03-22 21:35 ` [tip: x86/microcode] x86/microcode: Check for offline CPUs before requesting new microcode tip-bot2 for Otavio Pontes
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=20210320145546.GC3338@zn.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=otavio.pontes@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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
Powered by JetHome