[lkml]   [2020]   [Jan]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Fix built-in early-load Intel microcode alignment
On 1/13/20, Luis Chamberlain <> wrote:
> So what happens with you use the built-in firmware loader for
> the Intel microcode at this time? I am surprised this issue
> wasn't reported earlier, so thanks for picking it up, but to
> be complete such a change requires a bit more information.
> What exactly happens now?

Before that 16-byte alignment patch was applied, my only one
microcode built-in BLOB was "accidentally" 16-byte aligned.

After that patch was applied, new kernel file was
exactly same. So, for me that patch did not change anything.

Same 16-byte alignment before and after patch:

$ grep " _fw_.*_bin"
ffffffff81f55e90 r _fw_intel_ucode_06_8e_09_bin

>> Fix this by forcing all built-in firmware BLOBs to 16-byte
>> alignment.
> That's a huge stretch, see below.

I understand and to some degree agree.

> So I'd like to determine first if we really need this.

We do need it. Violating Intel specs is not good. It may be that
some processor models require aligned and some accept less

> If set as a global new config option, we can use the same logic and
> allow an architecture override if the user / architecture kconfig
> configures it such:
> string "Default architecture firmware aligmnent"
> "4" if 64BIT
> "3" if !64BIT
> string "Built in firmware aligment requirement"
> Some good description goes here
> Or something like that.

It doesn't have to user visible config option, only default align
changed when selected set of options are enabled.

My patch was intentionally minimal, without #ifdef spaghetti.

Jari Ruusu 4096R/8132F189 12D6 4C3A DCDA 0AA4 27BD ACDF F073 3C80 8132 F189

 \ /
  Last update: 2020-01-13 20:59    [W:1.521 / U:0.044 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site