Do it the same way as done in microcode_intel.c: use pr_debug()
for missing firmware files.
There seem to be CPUs out there for which no microcode update
has been submitted to kernel-firmware repo yet resulting in
scary sounding error messages in dmesg:
microcode: failed to load file amd-ucode/microcode_amd_fam16h.bin
Signed-off-by: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
Acked-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Cc: <stable@kernel.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1384274383-43510-1-git-send-email-trenn@suse.de
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
On AMD family 14h, applying microcode patch on the a core (core0)
would also affect the other core (core1) in the same compute
unit. The driver would skip applying the patch on core1, but it
still need to update kernel structures to reflect the proper
patch level.
The current logic is not updating the struct
ucode_cpu_info.cpu_sig.rev of the skipped core. This causes the
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/microcode/version to report
incorrect patch level as shown below:
$ grep . cpu?/microcode/version
cpu0/microcode/version:0x600063d
cpu1/microcode/version:0x6000626
cpu2/microcode/version:0x600063d
cpu3/microcode/version:0x6000626
cpu4/microcode/version:0x600063d
Signed-off-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>
Acked-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Cc: <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: <jacob.w.shin@gmail.com>
Cc: <herrmann.der.user@googlemail.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1285806432-1995-1-git-send-email-suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
load_microcode_amd() (and the helper it is using) should not have an
cpu parameter. The microcode loading does not depend on the CPU wrt the
patches loaded since they will end up in a global list for all CPUs
anyway.
The change from cpu to x86family in load_microcode_amd()
now allows to drop the code messing with cpu_data(cpu) from
collect_cpu_info_amd_early(), which is wrong anyway because at that
point the per-cpu cpu_info is not yet setup (These values would later be
overwritten by smp_store_boot_cpu_info() / smp_store_cpu_info()).
Fold the rest of collect_cpu_info_amd_early() into load_ucode_amd_ap(),
because its only used at one place and without the cpuinfo_x86 accesses
it was not much left.
Signed-off-by: Torsten Kaiser <just.for.lkml@googlemail.com>
[ Fengguang: build fix ]
Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
[ Boris: adapt it to current tree. ]
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
list_for_each_entry_reverse() dereferences the iterator, but we already
freed it. I don't see a reason that this has to be done in reverse order
so change it to use list_for_each_entry_safe().
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>
Limit the access to userspace only on the BSP where we load the
container, verify the patches in it and put them in the patch cache.
Then, at application time, we lookup the correct patch in the cache and
use it.
When we need to reload the userspace container, we do that over the
reload interface:
echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/microcode/reload
which reloads (a possibly newer) container from userspace and applies
then the newest patches from there.
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1344361461-10076-13-git-send-email-bp@amd64.org
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
We search the equivalence table using the CPUID(1) signature of the
CPU in order to get the equivalence ID of the patch which we need to
apply. Add a function which does the reverse - it will be needed in
later patches.
While at it, pull the other equiv table function up in the file so that
it can be used by other functionality without forward declarations.
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1344361461-10076-11-git-send-email-bp@amd64.org
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
Make sure we're actually applying a microcode patch to a core which
really needs it.
This brings only a very very very minor slowdown on F10:
0.032218828 sec vs 0.056010626 sec with this patch.
And small speedup on F15:
0.487089449 sec vs 0.180551162 sec (from perf output).
Also, fixup comments while at it.
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1344361461-10076-8-git-send-email-bp@amd64.org
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
This issue was recently observed on an AMD C-50 CPU where a patch of
maximum size was applied.
Commit be62adb492 ("x86, microcode, AMD: Simplify ucode verification")
added current_size in get_matching_microcode(). This is calculated as
size of the ucode patch + 8 (ie. size of the header). Later this is
compared against the maximum possible ucode patch size for a CPU family.
And of course this fails if the patch has already maximum size.
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> [3.3+]
Signed-off-by: Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1344361461-10076-1-git-send-email-bp@amd64.org
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
We've decided to provide CPU family specific container files
(starting with CPU family 15h). E.g. for family 15h we have to
load microcode_amd_fam15h.bin instead of microcode_amd.bin
Rationale is that starting with family 15h patch size is larger
than 2KB which was hard coded as maximum patch size in various
microcode loaders (not just Linux).
Container files which include patches larger than 2KB cause
different kinds of trouble with such old patch loaders. Thus we
have to ensure that the default container file provides only
patches with size less than 2KB.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@amd.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>
Cc: <stable@kernel.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20120120164412.GD24508@alberich.amd.com
[ documented the naming convention and tidied the code a bit. ]
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Once we've found and validated the ucode patch for the current CPU,
there's no need to iterate over the remaining patches in the binary
image. Exit then and save us a bunch of cycles.
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>
Basically, what we did until now is take out a chunk of the firmware
image, vmalloc space for it and inspect it before application. And
repeat.
This patch changes all that so that we look at each ucode patch from
the firmware image, check it for sanity and copy it to local buffer for
application only once and if it passes all checks. Thus, vmalloc-ing for
each piece is gone, we can do proper size checking only of the patch
which is destined for the CPU of the current machine instead of each
single patch, which is clearly wrong.
Oh yeah, simplify and cleanup the code while at it, along with adding
comments as to what actually happens.
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>
Add a simple 4K page which gets allocated on driver init and freed on
driver exit instead of vmalloc'ing small buffers for each ucode patch.
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@amd.com>
