Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] x86/microcode/intel: Print when early microcode loading fails

[Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>]

Hi Boris,

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 12:58:12PM -0800, Tony Luck wrote:
> > If there is no microcode, we don't print anything. So what's loaded in the
> > CPU is the latest version. When we have something we can always tell if its
> > successful or not.
> >
> > Its not a microcode file in initrd, but a matching microcode to load. If
> > none is found, nothing to worry about.
> >
> > We just agreed to show both failed and success for late-load. Doing this is
> > consistent with that isn't it?
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Y7iYLbEJSYnVn+dW@zn.tnic/
> >
> > Ingo's:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Y7k9DNz%2F%2FvqBAvZK@gmail.com/
> >
> > Should we treat early loading differently?
> 
> Getting a better set of messages from early microcode update would
> be a "nice-to-have" feature. But if there is no agreement on what those
> messages should look like, perhaps just skip this part for now.
> 
> Then Ashok can move on to the real issue of allowing LATE_LOAD for a
> microcode that supports the new "minrev" header field.
> 
If this is the one blocking this series, as Tony proposed, its not worth
loosing sleep over this.

Would you recommend resubmitting a new set with the fixes for the interim
patch compile failures (for 32bit) and drop this last patch?

If you have any other comments would be great to hear now before I repost a
new series to capture everything that's need to be addressed.

As always you can change commit logs to your satisfaction, I try, but its
still not as perfect as how you like to see them.

Cheers,
Ashok