From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
x86@kernel.org
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>,
Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@suse.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/microcode/intel: Refresh old_microcode defines with the May 2026 release
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2026 06:30:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fdacae40-f4df-43af-9f8f-7c80df5d42f1@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9c7c9b2b-2d1f-4b51-a411-e0869766e3ab@citrix.com>
On 9/29/26 06:08, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> This a known-buggy SRF ucode. The only reason there wasn't an explicit
> retraction of it was because a newer IPU had already been published,
> with 0x030003b2 being believed to be good again.
That's good to know, thanks.
But, for now, we've chosen to trail the ucode repo. On some level, the
kernel is always going to be "wrong" to some degree. In this case, the
cost of being "wrong" is that we're giving an answer to the old/new
question that's from May and not August or September.
The only real way to fix this is to be more aggressive about how far we
trail the official repo. Is this SRF issue a strong enough reason to
change that temporarily or permanently?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-29 13:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-28 22:26 Sohil Mehta
2026-09-28 22:40 ` [tip: x86/microcode] " tip-bot2 for Sohil Mehta
2026-09-29 13:08 ` [PATCH v2] " Andrew Cooper
2026-09-29 13:30 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2026-09-29 17:38 ` Andrew Cooper
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=fdacae40-f4df-43af-9f8f-7c80df5d42f1@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nik.borisov@suse.com \
--cc=pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sohil.mehta@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--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®