Re: [PATCH 0/3] x86/microcode: support for microcode update in Xendom0

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

On 10/12/2011 12:45 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 03:18:22PM -0400, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> While doing the whole boot time multiboot thing may offer some small
>> hypothetical technical advantages, it has the significant cost of just
>> complicating the whole deployment and use story.
> You simply can't call the need to apply ucode as early as possible a
> "hypothetical techical advantage."

The current scheme has worked pretty well so far; there doesn't seem to
be a huge concern about it.  Have there been actual observed failures
with the current mechanism, or is the drive to make it earlier driven by
an aesthetic desire to make it "as it should be"?

>  Other issues like how to handle ucode
> images and how to put them together and how distros distribute them
> and whether xen minimizes the amount of "specialness" or not are only
> secondary.

No, they're not.  If users end up with a broken setup then they get no
microcode updates at all, which makes everything else moot.  It has to
be deployed correctly for it to be worth anything at all.

What is secondary, or rather, completely irrelevant is whether Xen is
involved or not.

    J
--
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/