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

[Ming Lei]

On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:25 PM, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> 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.

You need to make sure your patch won't break userspace in old
distribution with your _currently_ code.

Actually if udev isn't used in your user space, the timeout issue
won't be triggered because it is blocked by udev.

Thanks,
--
Ming Lei
--
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/