Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86, microcode: Make reload interface per system

[H. Peter Anvin]

Not quite.

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>On Fri, 22 Jun 2012, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 06/20/2012 04:09 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> > Yeah, both should be workable. Let's see what Intel wants to do:
>hpa,
>> > Fenghua?
>> 
>> What we want to do is to have a unified binary blob (which would be
>> about half that size) but the format may be affected by Fenghua's
>> ongoing work so we're not quite ready to rev the format now just to
>do
>> it again.
>
>Any reason why you can't just take a single file with one binary
>microcode
>appended back-to-back after the other (i.e. exactly what
>/dev/cpu/microcode
>accepts)?
>
>You'd only be able to release that memory after all cores were brought
>online [and any microcode that did get used to update a core was copied
>somewhere else for future use], but that's hardly a big problem.
>
>-- 
>  "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

-- 
Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse brevity and lack of formatting.
--
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/