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

[Prarit Bhargava]

On 10/21/2013 10:43 PM, Ming Lei wrote:
> 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.
> 

AFAICT, Suse, Ubuntu, Linux Mint and Fedora all work with my changes.

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/