public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel J Blueman <daniel@numascale.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Quentin Casasnovas <quentin.casasnovas@oracle.com>,
	Steffen Persvold <sp@numascale.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Unbreak early processor microcode loading
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2015 16:27:12 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54F6C1E0.4060706@numascale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150303163836.GC25768@pd.tnic>

On 04/03/2015 00:38, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 11:10:44PM +0800, Daniel J Blueman wrote:
>> The changes in 871b72dd "x86: microcode: use smp_call_function_single instead
>> of set_cpus_allowed, cleanup of synchronization logic" introduced a check
>> that prevents built-in microcode from being loaded before init starts.
>>
>> Conditionalise it on early microcode loading, so we get the expected behaviour
>> when early microcode loading is enabled, and when it is not. This has potential
>> importance as BIOSes often don't load the current microcode.
>
> ... probably because they don't have it. Which is also the main reason
> for the existence of this microcode loader btw :)
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel J Blueman <daniel@numascale.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c | 2 ++
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
>> index 36a8361..fa7f9fc 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
>> @@ -391,9 +391,11 @@ static enum ucode_state microcode_init_cpu(int cpu, bool refresh_fw)
>>   	if (collect_cpu_info(cpu))
>>   		return UCODE_ERROR;
>>
>> +#if !defined(CONFIG_MICROCODE_AMD_EARLY) && !defined(CONFIG_MICROCODE_INTEL_EARLY)
>>   	/* --dimm. Trigger a delayed update? */
>>   	if (system_state != SYSTEM_RUNNING)
>>   		return UCODE_NFOUND;
>> +#endif
>
> Ok, let me try to understand this correctly: where is this microcode
> built in, into the kernel?
>
> If yes, you should consider enabling the early loading
> method and build in the microcode into the initrd, see
> Documentation/x86/early-microcode.txt
>
> This is the preferred method as we're applying the microcode much
> earlier.
>
> Back to you.

Yes, it's built into the kernel with config:

CONFIG_FIRMWARE_IN_KERNEL=y
CONFIG_EXTRA_FIRMWARE="amd-ucode/microcode_amd.bin 
amd-ucode/microcode_amd_fam15h.bin"
CONFIG_EXTRA_FIRMWARE_DIR="../firmware"

That's as some customer and in-house environments we use are 
initramfs-less and some we don't have direct control over the initramfs.

I don't see why built-in microcode loading shouldn't work, so I guess 
the question is, why was that 'system_state .. RUNNING' check introduced?

If just a cleanup and loading built-in microcode early was overlooked, 
it may be reasonable to conditionalise the check like so.

Thanks,
   Daniel

  reply	other threads:[~2015-03-04  8:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-03 15:10 [PATCH] x86: Unbreak early processor microcode loading Daniel J Blueman
2015-03-03 16:38 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-03-04  8:27   ` Daniel J Blueman [this message]
2015-03-04  9:18     ` Borislav Petkov
2015-03-04 11:45       ` Borislav Petkov
2015-03-18  9:09         ` Daniel J Blueman
2015-03-18 10:02           ` Borislav Petkov
2015-03-18 18:42             ` Borislav Petkov
2015-03-19  7:30               ` Daniel J Blueman
2015-03-19  9:27                 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-04-29 18:23                   ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2015-04-29 18:43                     ` Borislav Petkov
2015-04-29 20:54                       ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2015-04-29 21:45                         ` 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=54F6C1E0.4060706@numascale.com \
    --to=daniel@numascale.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=quentin.casasnovas@oracle.com \
    --cc=sp@numascale.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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