On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 12:32:02PM +, Sironi, Filippo wrote:
> I've that patch in my tree already, I can post it.
> I'm still curious on why you'd prefer to use boot_cpu_data for all
> CPUs instead of using cpu_data(m->extcpu) though.
Well, for starters, boot_cpu_data having stale revision is
> On 1. Jun 2018, at 14:19, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 01:30:26PM +0200, Filippo Sironi wrote:
>> Commit fa94d0c6e0f3 ("x86/MCE: Save microcode revision in machine check
>> records") extended MCE entries to report the microcode revision taken
>> from boot_cpu_data. Unfortu
On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 01:30:26PM +0200, Filippo Sironi wrote:
> Commit fa94d0c6e0f3 ("x86/MCE: Save microcode revision in machine check
> records") extended MCE entries to report the microcode revision taken
> from boot_cpu_data. Unfortunately, boot_cpu_data isn't updated on late
> microcode load
Commit fa94d0c6e0f3 ("x86/MCE: Save microcode revision in machine check
records") extended MCE entries to report the microcode revision taken
from boot_cpu_data. Unfortunately, boot_cpu_data isn't updated on late
microcode loading, thus making MCE entries slightly incorrect.
Use cpu_info instead, w
4 matches
Mail list logo