Re: x86, microcode: BUG: microcode update that changes x86_capability

[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2014, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > But IMHO we still need to detect and do something smart when
> > x86_capability changes due to a microcode update.
> > 
> > And I'd really prefer it to be "update x86_capability, warn the user and
> > carry on" for anything that is not going to crash the kernel.
> 
> The problem is with hiding CPUID bits and userspace using HLE after
> having detected it previously. I think we'll be on the safe side if we

It is safe to apply this particular batch of problematic microcode updades
inside the regular initramfs, as long as you do it as one of the very first
tasks.

This isn't an useless fix, it will allow systems without early initramfs
support to operate correctly after a microcode update.  And kernels 3.0, 3.2
and 3.4 _cannot_ apply early initramfs microcode updates at all, so they
need it.

Besides, we need to detect and scream bloody murder when microcode updates
do something like this anyway, now that the pandora box was opened.  If
we're going to detect it, might as well fix it when it is not something the
kernel uses.

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh
--
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/