[PATCH 2/3] x86: microcode: report if no microcode file was found

[Denys Vlasenko]

Before this change, successful microcode uploads clearly
indicate that it was done:

microcode: CPU1 sig=0x206a7, pf=0x10, revision=0x1a
microcode: CPU1 updated to revision 0x29, date = 2013-06-12

whereas if microcode was not uploaded, it is not clear why:

microcode: CPU1 sig=0x206a7, pf=0x10, revision=0x29
(nothing more)

So, what was it? No microcode file? No microcode for this sig/pf?
CPU already has microcode with this (or newer) revision?

In practice, it means that I heed to ask people to provide me
with more information ("do you have microcode package installed?
which version is it?").

This change upgrades existing message from pr_debug to pr_info,
which covers "no microcode file" case:

microcode: CPU1 sig=0x206a7, pf=0x10, revision=0x29
microcode: data file intel-ucode/06-2a-07 load failed

Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
index ef8b17c..9ce22b0 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
@@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ static enum ucode_state request_microcode_fw(int cpu, struct device *device,
 		c->x86, c->x86_model, c->x86_mask);
 
 	if (request_firmware_direct(&firmware, name, device)) {
-		pr_debug("data file %s load failed\n", name);
+		pr_info("data file %s load failed\n", name);
 		return UCODE_NFOUND;
 	}
 
-- 
1.8.1.4

--
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/