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

[Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]

On Thu, 30 Oct 2014, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> 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.

I've answered these points in one of the replies I just sent.

-- 
  "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/