From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754101Ab2FLUwj (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2012 16:52:39 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:45747 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751936Ab2FLUwi (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2012 16:52:38 -0400 Message-ID: <4FD7ABFE.6090801@zytor.com> Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 13:52:14 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Borislav Petkov , Andi Kleen , x86@kernel.org, eranian@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: Track minimum microcode revision globally References: <1339533234-2265-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <20120612204917.GA26817@liondog.tnic> In-Reply-To: <20120612204917.GA26817@liondog.tnic> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/12/2012 01:49 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > What do we need that for? Mixed-ucode versions? > Different CPUs in a multisocket system may have different compatible ucode versions. Of course, I am not even sure if it makes any sense at all to compare microcode versions without qualifying them with F:M:S. -hpa