From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753990AbZCIRER (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Mar 2009 13:04:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751385AbZCIREB (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Mar 2009 13:04:01 -0400 Received: from vms173001pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.1]:44144 "EHLO vms173001pub.verizon.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751243AbZCIREA (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Mar 2009 13:04:00 -0400 From: Gene Heskett Organization: Organization? Not detectable To: Sitsofe Wheeler Subject: Re: Linux* Processor Microcode Data File Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 13:03:31 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.11.0 (Linux/2.6.28.7; KDE/4.2.0; i686; ; ) Cc: Arjan van de Ven , Dragoslav Zaric , LKML , tigran@aivazian.fsnet.co.uk, Andreas Herrmann References: <2d05c4580903090243k6cf73ee9ubb6c4fccf0f07a2f@mail.gmail.com> <200903091158.22918.gene.heskett@verizon.net> <20090309162416.GC24213@silver.sucs.org> In-reply-to: <20090309162416.GC24213@silver.sucs.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Content-disposition: inline Message-id: <200903091303.32022.gene.heskett@verizon.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Monday 09 March 2009, Sitsofe Wheeler wrote: >At the risk of being wrong twice in a row... > >On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 11:58:22AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: >> I'll have to admit it was with some trepidation that I might brick my >> processor, which is a quad core AMD 9550, stepping 03 running at 2.2 ghz, >> but > >Microcode patching in this particular fashion (i.e. _not_ updating the >BIOS but "on the fly") is volatile (so it has to be redone at every >boot) which should mean it is very hard to brick a machine this way as >rebooting will undo everything. Of course someone is going to tell me >how they managed to kill a machine stone dead due to some sequence of >events I hadn't thought of and I disclaim any responsiblity if someone >tries to update their microcode and harms their machine in any fashion - >you update at your own risk :). > >> the directions didn't note until the end, that it would take a 2.6.29 >> series kernel to do it and I was running 2.6.28.7. But when I got to the >> modprobe -r microcode, modprobe microcode part, there was no feedback from >> either command. So did I, or did I not do this as I was and am running >> 2.6.28.7? The following was reported in my log: > >modprobe generally doesn't return much if the module in question loads >or (as in this case because you were using -r) is removed. That's the >typical Unix command line behviour - no response/output on "OK". > >> Mar 9 07:22:04 coyote kernel: [65725.855365] platform microcode: >> firmware: requesting amd-ucode/microcode_amd.bin Mar 9 07:22:04 coyote >> kernel: [65725.863101] microcode: size 1936, total_size 960 Mar 9 >> 07:22:04 coyote kernel: [65725.863107] microcode: CPU3 patch does not >> match (processor_rev_id: 1020, eqiv_cpu_id: 1022) Mar 9 07:22:04 coyote >> kernel: [65725.863110] microcode: size 968, total_size 960 Mar 9 07:22:04 >> coyote kernel: [65725.863120] microcode: CPU3 updated from revision >> 0x1000065 to 0x1000083 Mar 9 07:22:04 coyote kernel: [65725.863122] >> Microcode Update Driver: v2.00 , Peter Oruba >> >> Inquiring minds and all that. Comments please? > >It looks like the firmware file (amd-ucode/microcode_amd.bin) doesn't >match your processor. CC'ing Andreas for comment as you have an AMD >machine... Thank You. But the text report above also says it did update it, hence the confusion. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) For fast-acting relief, try slowing down.