mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: LKML Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	X86-kernel <x86@kernel.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Allow late loading only if a min rev is specified
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 11:36:12 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e46c20a5-9f43-6ec4-6c2e-ea6891a8ce0d@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220829180436.716672-1-ashok.raj@intel.com>

On 8/29/22 11:04, Ashok Raj wrote:
> Any microcode that modifies the interface to an OS-visible feature
> will set the min_version to itself. This will enforce this microcode is
> not suitable for late loading unless the currently loaded revision is greater
> or equal to the new microcode affecting the change.

I know this hasn't quite made it into the normal Intel documentation
channels.  But, it would be nice to make sure that we have a _really_
solid description here of the architecture of min_rev which is *very*
close to what the Intel folks building microcode images agreed to.

This whole thing is useless if the architecture contract isn't ironclad
and agreed to by both sides.

One other thing on that note...  The CPU itself authenticates the
microcode.  The OS trusts that the CPU will verify the integrity of the
image.

But, this min_rev is not part of the image that the CPU verifies, right?
 If you get your microcode images out of the back of a van in the shady
part of town, nobody can promise that min_rev in the header follows the
rules.

I don't think we need to defend against that.  I'm not sure we really
even *can* defend against it.  It's probably good to note, though.

  reply	other threads:[~2022-08-29 18:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-08-29 18:04 Ashok Raj
2022-08-29 18:36 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2022-08-29 18:52   ` Ashok Raj
2022-08-29 20:24     ` Dave Hansen
2022-08-29 20:31 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-08-29 22:41   ` Ashok Raj
2022-09-01  2:53     ` Borislav Petkov

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=e46c20a5-9f43-6ec4-6c2e-ea6891a8ce0d@intel.com \
    --to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --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®