Patch in Fixes: causes the usual:
unchecked MSR access error: RDMSR from 0x17 at ... (intel_get_platform_id)
Call Trace:
early_init_intel
early_cpu_init
setup_arch
_printk
start_kernel
x86_64_start_reservations
x86_64_start_kernel
common_startup_64
because the kernel is booted in a guest.
In order to avoid it, this MSR access needs to be prevented when running
virtualized. That is usually done by checking X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR but
for this particular case it is too early yet.
The platform ID needs to be read as early as when microcode is loaded on
the BSP:
load_ucode_bsp ... -> get_microcode_blob ... -> intel_find_matching_signature
and by that time, CPUID leafs haven't been parsed yet.
The microcode loader already has logic to check early whether the kernel
is running virtualized so make that globally available to arch/x86/. The
query whether running virtualized is getting more and more prominent in
recent times so might as well make it an arch-global var which the rest
of the code can use.
Fixes: d8630b67ca ("x86/cpu: Add platform ID to CPU info structure")
Reported-by: Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Reviewed-by: Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
Tested-by: Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260430020953.1405535-1-binbin.wu@linux.intel.com
The end goal here is to be able to do x86_match_cpu() and match on a
specific platform ID. While it would be possible to stash this ID
off somewhere or read it dynamically, that approaches would not be
consistent with the other fields which can be matched.
Read the platform ID and store it in cpuinfo_x86.
There are lots of sites to set this new field. Place it near
the place c->microcode is established since the platform ID is
so closely intertwined with microcode updates.
Note: This should not grow the size of 'struct cpuinfo_x86' in
practice since the u8 fits next to another u8 in the structure.
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260304181020.8D518228@davehans-spike.ostc.intel.com
Today, the only code that cares about the platform ID is the microcode
update code itself. To facilitate storing the platform ID in a more
generic place and using it outside of the microcode update itself, put
the enumeration into a helper function. Mirror
intel_get_microcode_revision()'s naming and location.
But, moving away from intel_collect_cpu_info() means that the model
and family information in CPUID is not readily available. Just call
CPUID again.
Note that the microcode header is a mask of supported platform IDs.
Only stick the ID part in the helper. Leave the 1<<id part in the
microcode handling.
Also note that the PII is weird. It does not really have a platform
ID because it doesn't even have the MSR. Just consider it to be
platform ID 0. Instead of saying >=PII, say <=PII. The PII is the
real oddball here being the only CPU with Linux microcode updates
but no platform ID. It's worth calling it out by name.
This does subtly change the sig->pf for the PII though from 0x0
to 0x1. Make up for that by ignoring sig->pf when the microcode
update platform mask is 0x0.
[ dhansen: reflow comment for bpetkov ]
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260304181018.EB6404F8@davehans-spike.ostc.intel.com
The functions for sending microcode data and retrieving the next offset
were previously placeholders, as they need to handle a specific mailbox
format.
While the kernel supports similar mailboxes, none of them are compatible
with this one. Attempts to share code led to unnecessary complexity, so
add a dedicated implementation instead.
[ bp: Sort the include properly. ]
Signed-off-by: Chang S. Bae <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Reviewed-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Tested-by: Anselm Busse <abusse@amazon.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/20250320234104.8288-1-chang.seok.bae@intel.com
Previously, per-package staging invocations and their associated state
data were established. The next step is to implement the actual staging
handler according to the specified protocol. Below are key aspects to
note:
(a) Each staging process must begin by resetting the staging hardware.
(b) The staging hardware processes up to a page-sized chunk of the
microcode image per iteration, requiring software to submit data
incrementally.
(c) Once a data chunk is processed, the hardware responds with an
offset in the image for the next chunk.
(d) The offset may indicate completion or request retransmission of an
already transferred chunk. As long as the total transferred data
remains within the predefined limit (twice the image size),
retransmissions should be acceptable.
Incorporate them in the handler, while data transmission and mailbox
format handling are implemented separately.
[ bp: Sort the headers in a reversed name-length order. ]
Signed-off-by: Chang S. Bae <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Reviewed-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Tested-by: Anselm Busse <abusse@amazon.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/20250320234104.8288-1-chang.seok.bae@intel.com
When microcode staging is initiated, operations are carried out through
an MMIO interface. Each package has a unique interface specified by the
IA32_MCU_STAGING_MBOX_ADDR MSR, which maps to a set of 32-bit registers.
Prepare staging with the following steps:
1. Ensure the microcode image is 32-bit aligned to match the MMIO
register size.
2. Identify each MMIO interface based on its per-package scope.
3. Invoke the staging function for each identified interface, which
will be implemented separately.
[ bp: Improve error logging. ]
Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Chang S. Bae <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Reviewed-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Tested-by: Anselm Busse <abusse@amazon.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/871pznq229.ffs@tglx
Consolidate the whole logic which determines whether the microcode loader
should be enabled or not into a single function and call it everywhere.
Well, almost everywhere - not in mk_early_pgtbl_32() because there the kernel
is running without paging enabled and checking dis_ucode_ldr et al would
require physical addresses and uglification of the code.
But since this is 32-bit, the easier thing to do is to simply map the initrd
unconditionally especially since that mapping is getting removed later anyway
by zap_early_initrd_mapping() and avoid the uglification.
In doing so, address the issue of old 486er machines without CPUID
support, not booting current kernels.
[ mingo: Fix no previous prototype for ‘microcode_loader_disabled’ [-Wmissing-prototypes] ]
Fixes: 4c585af718 ("x86/boot/32: Temporarily map initrd for microcode loading")
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: <stable@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/CANpbe9Wm3z8fy9HbgS8cuhoj0TREYEEkBipDuhgkWFvqX0UoVQ@mail.gmail.com
The Family model check to read the processor flag MSR is misleading and
potentially incorrect. It doesn't consider Family while comparing the
model number. The original check did have a Family number but it got
lost/moved during refactoring.
intel_collect_cpu_info() is called through multiple paths such as early
initialization, CPU hotplug as well as IFS image load. Some of these
flows would be error prone due to the ambiguous check.
Correct the processor flag scan check to use a Family number and update
it to a VFM based one to make it more readable.
Signed-off-by: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250219184133.816753-4-sohil.mehta@intel.com
Currently, an unconditional cache flush is performed during every
microcode update. Although the original changelog did not mention
a specific erratum, this measure was primarily intended to address
a specific microcode bug, the load of which has already been blocked by
is_blacklisted(). Therefore, this cache flush is no longer necessary.
Additionally, the side effects of doing this have been overlooked. It
increases CPU rendezvous time during late loading, where the cache flush
takes between 1x to 3.5x longer than the actual microcode update.
Remove native_wbinvd() and update the erratum name to align with the
latest errata documentation, document ID 334163 Version 022US.
[ bp: Zap the flaky documentation URL. ]
Fixes: 91df9fdf51 ("x86/microcode/intel: Writeback and invalidate caches before updating microcode")
Reported-by: Yan Hua Wu <yanhua1.wu@intel.com>
Reported-by: William Xie <william.xie@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Chang S. Bae <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Acked-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Tested-by: Yan Hua Wu <yanhua1.wu@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241001161042.465584-2-chang.seok.bae@intel.com
After successful update, the late loading routine prints an update
summary similar to:
microcode: load: updated on 128 primary CPUs with 128 siblings
microcode: revision: 0x21000170 -> 0x21000190
Remove the redundant message in the Intel side of the driver.
[ bp: Massage commit message. ]
Signed-off-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/ZWjYhedNfhAUmt0k@a4bf019067fa.jf.intel.com
The AMD side of the loader issues the microcode revision for each
logical thread on the system, which can become really noisy on huge
machines. And doing that doesn't make a whole lot of sense - the
microcode revision is already in /proc/cpuinfo.
So in case one is interested in the theoretical support of mixed silicon
steppings on AMD, one can check there.
What is also missing on the AMD side - something which people have
requested before - is showing the microcode revision the CPU had
*before* the early update.
So abstract that up in the main code and have the BSP on each vendor
provide those revision numbers.
Then, dump them only once on driver init.
On Intel, do not dump the patch date - it is not needed.
Reported-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/CAHk-=wg=%2B8rceshMkB4VnKxmRccVLtBLPBawnewZuuqyx5U=3A@mail.gmail.com
In general users, don't have the necessary information to determine
whether late loading of a new microcode version is safe and does not
modify anything which the currently running kernel uses already, e.g.
removal of CPUID bits or behavioural changes of MSRs.
To address this issue, Intel has added a "minimum required version"
field to a previously reserved field in the microcode header. Microcode
updates should only be applied if the current microcode version is equal
to, or greater than this minimum required version.
Thomas made some suggestions on how meta-data in the microcode file could
provide Linux with information to decide if the new microcode is suitable
candidate for late loading. But even the "simpler" option requires a lot of
metadata and corresponding kernel code to parse it, so the final suggestion
was to add the 'minimum required version' field in the header.
When microcode changes visible features, microcode will set the minimum
required version to its own revision which prevents late loading.
Old microcode blobs have the minimum revision field always set to 0, which
indicates that there is no information and the kernel considers it
unsafe.
This is a pure OS software mechanism. The hardware/firmware ignores this
header field.
For early loading there is no restriction because OS visible features
are enumerated after the early load and therefore a change has no
effect.
The check is always enabled, but by default not enforced. It can be
enforced via Kconfig or kernel command line.
If enforced, the kernel refuses to late load microcode with a minimum
required version field which is zero or when the currently loaded
microcode revision is smaller than the minimum required revision.
If not enforced the load happens independent of the revision check to
stay compatible with the existing behaviour, but it influences the
decision whether the kernel is tainted or not. If the check signals that
the late load is safe, then the kernel is not tainted.
Early loading is not affected by this.
[ tglx: Massaged changelog and fixed up the implementation ]
Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231002115903.776467264@linutronix.de
Applying microcode late can be fatal for the running kernel when the
update changes functionality which is in use already in a non-compatible
way, e.g. by removing a CPUID bit.
There is no way for admins which do not have access to the vendors deep
technical support to decide whether late loading of such a microcode is
safe or not.
Intel has added a new field to the microcode header which tells the
minimal microcode revision which is required to be active in the CPU in
order to be safe.
Provide infrastructure for handling this in the core code and a command
line switch which allows to enforce it.
If the update is considered safe the kernel is not tainted and the annoying
warning message not emitted. If it's enforced and the currently loaded
microcode revision is not safe for late loading then the load is aborted.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231017211724.079611170@linutronix.de
stop_machine() does not prevent the spin-waiting sibling from handling
an NMI, which is obviously violating the whole concept of rendezvous.
Implement a static branch right in the beginning of the NMI handler
which is nopped out except when enabled by the late loading mechanism.
The late loader enables the static branch before stop_machine() is
invoked. Each CPU has an nmi_enable in its control structure which
indicates whether the CPU should go into the update routine.
This is required to bridge the gap between enabling the branch and
actually being at the point where it is required to enter the loader
wait loop.
Each CPU which arrives in the stopper thread function sets that flag and
issues a self NMI right after that. If the NMI function sees the flag
clear, it returns. If it's set it clears the flag and enters the
rendezvous.
This is safe against a real NMI which hits in between setting the flag
and sending the NMI to itself. The real NMI will be swallowed by the
microcode update and the self NMI will then let stuff continue.
Otherwise this would end up with a spurious NMI.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231002115903.489900814@linutronix.de
Nothing needs struct ucode_cpu_info. Make it take struct cpu_signature,
let it return a boolean and simplify the implementation. Rename it now
that the silly name clash with collect_cpu_info() is gone.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231017211722.851573238@linutronix.de
