Re: [BUG BISECTED] Phenom microcode revision mis-applied

From: Jason Cooper
Date: Mon Dec 30 2013 - 07:37:09 EST

On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 10:02:02PM -0500, Gene Heskett wrote:
> Finally done with the forward bisect:
> gene@coyote:~/linux-stable$ dmesg|grep -A2 microcode
> microcode: CPU0: patch_level=0x01000065
> microcode: CPU0: new patch_level=0x01000083
> microcode: CPU1: patch_level=0x01000065
> microcode: CPU1: new patch_level=0x01000083
> microcode: CPU2: patch_level=0x01000065
> microcode: CPU2: new patch_level=0x01000083
> microcode: CPU3: patch_level=0x01000065
> microcode: CPU3: new patch_level=0x01000083
> microcode: Microcode Update Driver: v2.00 <tigran@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Oruba
> gene@coyote:~/linux-stable$ git bisect good
> 1a45c310b2102c58e37f84abba67fe21d5d6edcf is the first bad commit
> commit 1a45c310b2102c58e37f84abba67fe21d5d6edcf
> Author: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu Mar 14 11:27:14 2013 -0700
> Linux 3.8.3
> :100644 100644 20d53183508e8f49253ec7e5ede0a12b4556fc32 8c49fc9b45a993a8e78cde4f9621b727b9121eac M Makefile
> The v3.8.3 Makefile? Its just about the only thing that would be bad
> every step from v3.8.3 to v3.8.2, and good all the way from v3.8.2 to
> the last patch that made the v3.8.3 release. Bisected twice, once in
> each direction.

When it works, which CONFIG_MICROCODE* options are set? And unset when it

Also, what is the driving problem here? I know the log entry 'new
patch_level=...' is missing, but what regression are you seeing that is
caused by not updating the microcode?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at