public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	Srinivas REDDY Eeda <srinivas.eeda@oracle.com>,
	hpa@zytor.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Ensure new microcode processor flags match with cpu's pf
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2018 12:49:40 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ed92d414-9869-cd06-eee1-1035cc574cf4@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180618195619.GH24921@zn.tnic>

On 2018/6/19 3:56, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 08:16:51AM +0000, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
>> Intel spec says: 'The processor flags in the 48-byte header and the
>> processor flags field associated with the extended processor signature
>> structures may have multiple bits set.'
>>
>> Make sure processor flags of the new microcode intersect with current
>> cpu's. Comparing with old microcode's pf can't guarantee this.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c |    8 +++-----
>>   1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
>> index 461e315..54f4014 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
>> @@ -371,12 +371,10 @@ static int microcode_sanity_check(void *mc, int print_err)
>>   				goto next;
>>   
>>   		} else {
>> -			struct microcode_header_intel *phdr = &patch->hdr;
>> -
>>   			if (!has_newer_microcode(data,
>> -						 phdr->sig,
>> -						 phdr->pf,
>> -						 phdr->rev))
>> +						 uci->cpu_sig.sig,
>> +						 uci->cpu_sig.pf,
>> +						 patch->hdr.rev))
>>   				goto next;
>>   		}
>>   
>> -- 
> 
> So I'm scratching my head over this and have no clue what you're trying
> to achieve. Is this a fix for a bug you're seeing or what? You'd need to
> be a lot more verbose when explaining what this patch is trying to do...
Imagine kernel already found a microcode blob A with extended sig/pf 
matching current cpu, then another microcode B is checked which doesn't 
match current cpu but matches the sig/pf of microcode A, then microcode 
B will replaced A, but it's not suitable for current cpu.

I didn't see same issue in our system. When fixing another bug and 
reading upstream microcode code, I found this potential issue, feel free 
to correct me if it's never possible in reality.

Thanks
Zhenzhong

  reply	other threads:[~2018-06-19  4:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-06-04  8:16 [PATCH] x86/microcode/intel: Ensure new microcode processor flags match with cpu's pf Zhenzhong Duan
2018-06-18 19:56 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-06-19  4:49   ` Zhenzhong Duan [this message]
2018-06-19  9:12     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-06-19  9:24       ` Zhenzhong Duan
2018-06-19  9:35         ` 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=ed92d414-9869-cd06-eee1-1035cc574cf4@oracle.com \
    --to=zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=srinivas.eeda@oracle.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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