Re: [PATCH 2/2] intel_microcode, Fix long microcode load time whenfirmware file is missing

[Prarit Bhargava]

On 10/21/2013 08:32 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> And why don't you pass FW_ACTION_HOTPLUG? and you are sure
>>> that udev isn't required to handle your microcode update request?
>>>
>>
>> AFAICT in both cases, udev wasn't required to handle the cpu microcode update.
>> Both drivers use CMH to load the firmware which removes the need for udev to do
>> anything.  Admittedly maybe I've missed some odd use case but I don't think it
>> is necessary.
> 
> OK, so I guess the CMH still need uevent to get notified, right?

The code as it is _currently_ written does not use uevents to load the processor
firmware.  ie) call_usermodehelper does not need uevent to get notified, so I
think FW_ACTION_NOHOTPLUG is correct.

P.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/