mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>,
	Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
	Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
	Stefan Talpalaru <stefantalpalaru@yahoo.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	"Benjamin Herrenschmidt" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zilstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
	Martin Pohlack <mpohlack@amazon.de>,
	Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch v3 Part2 3/9] x86/microcode/intel: Fix collect_cpu_info() to reflect current microcode
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 11:32:40 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y9q+WL+hnS5ZymDj@a4bf019067fa.jf.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <388d0260-042c-209f-a986-c9ca47061b3c@intel.com>

On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 11:13:58AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 1/30/23 13:39, Ashok Raj wrote:
> > Currently collect_cpu_info() is only returning what was cached earlier
> > instead of reading the current revision from the proper MSR.
> > 
> > Collect the current revision and report that value instead of reflecting
> > what was cached in the past.
> > 
> > [TBD:
> >     Need to change microcode/amd.c. I didn't quite follow the logic since
> >     it reports the revision from the patch file, instead of reporting the
> >     real PATCH_LEVEL MSR.
> > 
> >     Untested on AMD.
> > ]
> 
> This thread is meandering a bit.  I think it's because this changelog
> doesn't have a problem statement.  It's hard to agree on a patch being a
> solution to anything if we haven't first agreed on the problem.
> 
> What is the problem?

I alluded here.. But yes, clearly missed in the commit log.

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Y9mW7EiL%2FBpYFLWn@a4bf019067fa.jf.intel.com/

Thomas alluded here https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/87y1pygiyf.ffs@tglx/
that error handling in __reload_late()::wait_for_siblings() code patch is
completely broken. 

This is one that I "assumed" he was referring to, since all we need is to
update the current revision, but we end up depending on the behavior of
apply_microcode() and that might accidentally have some side effects. 

Instead only call the collect_cpu_info() and allow that to update the
per-cpu revision instead. And there is no risk in performing that vs
accidentally letting it fall through with an apply_microcode() that might
have risks.

> 
> What does this "fix"?

The code performs this delicate late-load dance to prevent sibling threads
to be quiet while performing the update.

At wait_for_siblings() when all threads arrive, then the sibling does the
apply_microcode() which seems wrong. 



  reply	other threads:[~2023-02-01 19:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-30 21:39 [Patch v3 Part2 0/9] x86/microcode: Declare microcode safe for late loading Ashok Raj
2023-01-30 21:39 ` [Patch v3 Part2 1/9] x86/microcode: Taint kernel only if microcode loading was successful Ashok Raj
2023-01-31 11:50   ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-31 16:51     ` Ashok Raj
2023-01-31 20:20       ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-31 22:54         ` Ashok Raj
2023-02-01 12:44           ` Borislav Petkov
2023-02-01 15:42             ` Ashok Raj
2023-02-01 21:47             ` Ashok Raj
2023-02-01 22:06               ` Borislav Petkov
2023-02-01 22:19                 ` Ashok Raj
2023-02-01 22:26                   ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-31 12:17   ` Li, Aubrey
2023-01-31 15:32     ` Ashok Raj
2023-01-30 21:39 ` [Patch v3 Part2 2/9] x86/microcode: Report invalid writes to reload sysfs file Ashok Raj
2023-01-31 15:57   ` [tip: x86/microcode] x86/microcode: Allow only "1" as a late reload trigger value tip-bot2 for Ashok Raj
2023-01-30 21:39 ` [Patch v3 Part2 3/9] x86/microcode/intel: Fix collect_cpu_info() to reflect current microcode Ashok Raj
2023-01-31 16:48   ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-31 17:34     ` Luck, Tony
2023-01-31 17:41       ` Ashok Raj
2023-01-31 20:40       ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-31 20:49         ` Luck, Tony
2023-01-31 21:08           ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-31 22:32             ` Ashok Raj
2023-01-31 22:43             ` Luck, Tony
2023-02-01 12:53               ` Borislav Petkov
2023-02-01 15:13                 ` Ashok Raj
2023-02-01 15:25                   ` Borislav Petkov
2023-02-01 16:15                 ` Luck, Tony
2023-02-01 19:13   ` Dave Hansen
2023-02-01 19:32     ` Ashok Raj [this message]
2023-01-30 21:39 ` [Patch v3 Part2 4/9] x86/microcode: Do not call apply_microcode() on sibling threads Ashok Raj
2023-02-01 22:21   ` Dave Hansen
2023-02-01 22:40     ` Borislav Petkov
2023-02-02  2:51       ` Ashok Raj
2023-02-02  9:40         ` Borislav Petkov
2023-02-02 16:34           ` Ashok Raj
2023-01-30 21:39 ` [Patch v3 Part2 5/9] x86/microcode: Move late load warning to the same function that taints kernel Ashok Raj
2023-01-30 21:39 ` [Patch v3 Part2 6/9] x86/microcode/intel: Add minimum required revision to microcode header Ashok Raj
2023-01-30 21:39 ` [Patch v3 Part2 7/9] x86/microcode: Add a generic mechanism to declare support for minrev Ashok Raj
2023-01-30 21:39 ` [Patch v3 Part2 8/9] x86/microcode/intel: Drop wbinvd() from microcode loading Ashok Raj
2023-01-30 21:39 ` [Patch v3 Part2 9/9] x86/microcode: Provide an option to override minrev enforcement Ashok Raj

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=Y9q+WL+hnS5ZymDj@a4bf019067fa.jf.intel.com \
    --to=ashok.raj@intel.com \
    --cc=Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mpohlack@amazon.de \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
    --cc=stefantalpalaru@yahoo.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
    --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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®