[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] x86/microcode: Allow reading microcode revision even if it can't be updated


  • To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 11:53:50 +0200
  • Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
  • Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=i2C03agM/7KnNzK2x6+keGEqWaARenoNAAcf9+aqZm4=; b=Ic4EtTCn3oPNdVq0riZlySdctXwtS3D15wDikc/OB0gjLZX/R6qxeMUBUi2vUvZbdaLIAsMHCP5hPsp/J6YVv90MjYFYzl2GkEVJxDnIEQCYK9fpf/5nd9p1cJWlsASpwbPy3/rJhF6+fU2+kRL94H+xZiDvM3TbRMAvFr/OXGEbgoAmI8icahHhuTt0TuD/2oRxqZewZYq/lFBf7qDdXmvymEGGzInY7m6/5CjxWhMSFW3Pg8zTJEq7CnoVP6kq52hwzVfG7sDWpObjXPY77pz4zfPLpXNwlBxMimud/nH7R39FIrIjoiBnVGQUM8zOp4mOHCaVTFngZCFJn4Iaxw==
  • Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=HWcBJP4xvzV50fCwpidkRvtkz44xNPvzz07dUNP2OOzy/woCPtBl9f82HWqPoVLLwA2vNx7k5fQxQcUjZP3u/9CRhC1KOrAE+Ic0vMe3pHCwv2SaXlIULZGjZYAZ/E/IDOO4SshK6vm1Pzx4o4XggzToiCOSaikmieKljkfIq2rtcNKhDqT6W9VGnDui0DakOscw0c+5AfUtCinB1FYrDq1Pmffel8ODyisHGTYXxl1Tpd27UEGgHVJ1hiOxVfnyNiYj+jkZMMb6Mz6WV5gSkl8VZMkP2Sa/DT1B75UtT5NYgraW+bmQK54x926Xfyy/BVdunhevZFBaBxGAmOZxaQ==
  • Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
  • Cc: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Alejandro Vallejo <alejandro.vallejo@xxxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 09:54:25 +0000
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>

On 19.06.2023 18:10, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 19.06.2023 18:06, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 19/06/2023 4:58 pm, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 19.06.2023 17:49, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>> On 15/06/2023 4:48 pm, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
>>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c 
>>>>> b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c
>>>>> index e65af4b82e..df7e1df870 100644
>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/microcode/core.c
>>>>> @@ -750,11 +750,12 @@ __initcall(microcode_init);
>>>>> @@ -860,6 +861,9 @@ int __init early_microcode_init(unsigned long 
>>>>> *module_map,
>>>>>          break;
>>>>>      }
>>>>>  
>>>>> +    if ( ucode_ops.collect_cpu_info )
>>>>> +        ucode_ops.collect_cpu_info();
>>>>> +
>>>> I still think this wants to be the other side of "ucode loading fully
>>>> unavailable", just below.
>>>>
>>>> I'm confident it will result in easier-to-follow logic.
>>> Yet wouldn't that be against the purpose of obtaining the ucode
>>> revision even if loading isn't possible?
>>
>> No.  The logical order of checks is:
>>
>> if ( !ops.apply )
>>     return; // Fully unavailable
>>
>> collect_cpu_info();
>>
>> if ( rev == ~0 || !can_load )
>>     return; // Loading unavailable
>>
>> // search for blob to load
>>
>>
>> This form has fewer misleading NULL checks, and doesn't get
>> printk(XENLOG_WARNING "Microcode loading not available\n"); after
>> successful microcode actions.
> 
> But from the earlier version and from what I've seen in patches 1-4
> so far, I expect patch 5 will introduce a case with ops.apply being
> NULL but ops.collect being non-NULL. Otherwise I don't see why patch
> 2 does what it does (sacrificing cf_clobber, albeit likely not really
> intentionally).

As expected with patch 5 ops.apply can be NULL without indicating
"fully unavailable". collect_cpu_info being NULL could be taken as
indicator of "fully unavailable", though.

Jan



 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.