From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3337DC001DE for ; Fri, 11 Aug 2023 01:32:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232733AbjHKBcA (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2023 21:32:00 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48060 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232768AbjHKBb6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Aug 2023 21:31:58 -0400 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2926F2D4F for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2023 18:31:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1691717516; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=M794NsiIVH7fC7DsaiqRd+31wUdGmjA7c++PEgDz3kQ=; b=xz1ucWhJez+Eg1YYjkBLuzQG3x7/jyUadSmp9VqWLDQvnK41YEQGcfqFQN+pHq99N8Mnbq BV93XR+PcBtSlNGyjmGv1zFuCWqbJCPf6ASwWOVw/UuPpLiWvnRvnwEsCj6hkwWOBnNgC3 v+z3rB/LoPGaUvBjPf/I93SeEO+cYOAeEwM6fEf9gWH7+UwPyJG1tsoOondhfD7eLM5ceP 0SOCMqE4UtchYQenhX786UonErBk09Oqiyhy/jDsuiXRc44qkC3RR2ub3LePhB9fa10njO /3/1vARTvMonfNANRmmIzbQGeuxkvW+pNu4luJoUImt9GWwN0+zdB6LQXqeMdg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1691717516; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=M794NsiIVH7fC7DsaiqRd+31wUdGmjA7c++PEgDz3kQ=; b=M2sVJJqs7tPX0aosfXcxmyBsdG03AL+MdaniDDj7t6LPhXLkIhxtzjNZ/WzBtPbt+Y15HK /j3Nk5u9KGtqhAAQ== To: Ashok Raj , Peter Zijlstra Cc: LKML , x86@kernel.org, Borislav Petkov , Arjan van de Ven , Ashok Raj Subject: Re: [patch 28/30] x86/microcode: Handle "offline" CPUs correctly In-Reply-To: <87h6p6ideo.ffs@tglx> References: <20230810153317.850017756@linutronix.de> <20230810160806.562016788@linutronix.de> <20230810204605.GF212435@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20230810210511.GH212435@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20230810222957.GJ212435@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <87h6p6ideo.ffs@tglx> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2023 03:31:56 +0200 Message-ID: <87cyzuictv.ffs@tglx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 11 2023 at 03:19, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, Aug 10 2023 at 16:02, Ashok Raj wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 12:29:57AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>> >>> Yeah, not placing constraints on who is online at all. Also, if both >>> siblings are offline, then onlining will re-load ucode anyway, no? >> >> We need one thread in a core online, because a MCE can happen and we don't >> want those running something stale. > > Nonsense. This is a constraint at boot time. But afterwards it does not > matter at all. That's what Peter is talking about. And worse. It does not matter whether one thread of a core is online or not in the case of a broadcast MCE during a microcode update simply because that's game over. Thanks, tglx