Re: [PATCH 4/8] x86, microcode, intel: add error logging to early update driver

[Borislav Petkov]

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 12:10:15PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> In fact, I have a patch somewhere that needs to add a new failure message:
> we have several failure cases which we want to differentiate, at the very
> least "processor didn't like it" and "it looks corrupt, so we didn't even
> try to install it".

Actually, I don't want to be too chatty with the loader: if the
microcode blob passes checks but it is not for the current processor
we're running, not saying anything is what I want to do.

Why? Because I don't want to disturb people unnecessarily - if the
microcode doesn't apply and everything else checks out, you simply don't
need it.

If one really wants to know, one can always check /proc/cpuinfo and read
out the microcode revision from the blob. But that is for the 1% of the
curious ones - everyone else should simply install microcode blob and
boot machine. Fire and forget.

Only the abnormal error cases should be vocal in saying what's wrong so
that we can actually address those.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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/