Re: [PATCH 0/7] IBRS patch series

Greg KH
2018-01-05T14:01:42Z

On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 02:47:45PM +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-01-05 at 14:28 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > > iucode-tool -L -tr n10ur16w.iso |grep 2017-11
> > > 001/020: sig 0x000306d4, pf_mask 0xc0, 2017-11-17, rev 0x0028, size
> > > 18432
> >
> > That's been out for a while now:
> > https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/27337/Linux-Processor-Micr
> > ocode-Data-File
> >
> > so I really don't think this is an "update" yet.
>
> Actually for my processor (0x000306d4 / i5-5200U) this release (20171117) only
> contains:
>
> 050/001: sig 0x000306d4, pf_mask 0xc0, 2017-01-27, rev 0x0025, size 17408
>
> I find it weird that the Intel release from 2017-11-17 doesn't contain a
> microcode file supposedly released on the same day, but it seems to be the
> case.

Doh, same here, sorry about that, should have checked the microcode
image file myself.

> > I saw a bios update for my Dell laptop dated December 28, but it didn't
> > seem to change anything with the cpuids or microcode status from before.
>
> Not sure which distribution you use nowadays but Henrique just pushed a
> microcode update to Debian with some collected microcodes:
>
> https://tracker.debian.org/news/899110
>
> Obviously it lacks a *lot* of processors (especially pre-Haswell).

I'm running Arch, but it would be nice to know where those microcode
updates came from, given that they aren't on the "official" Intel page
yet :)

> > A hard answer to what "soon" means here would be nice to get, as I'm
> > seeing a lot of misunderstanding floating around right now :(
>
> Agreed, but I'm not sure who can provide the information.

That's why I'm asking here, hopefully Arjan might have an idea.

thanks,

greg k-h