From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1756742AbaIWUBF (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 23 Sep 2014 16:01:05 -0400
Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:44628 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1756639AbaIWUBC (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 23 Sep 2014 16:01:02 -0400
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 22:00:54 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>
Cc: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert.lkml@gmail.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: x86, microcode: BUG: microcode update that changes x86_capability
Message-ID: <20140923200054.GB16467@pd.tnic>
References: <20140918145328.0253f009@as>
 <9c84cde6-3d70-4337-8738-0283d06d8cf0@email.android.com>
 <20140918200659.GA5331@khazad-dum.debian.net>
 <20140919001311.GB5331@khazad-dum.debian.net>
 <CALCETrVoeqQUXH7g+reu=hUvCJoiy+edHKBqYKPWXPCS3_UtUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140919110014.GC29639@khazad-dum.debian.net>
 <20140919112953.GA3256@nazgul.tnic>
 <20140919075415.5149d5f2@as>
 <20140919150042.GC5318@nazgul.tnic>
 <20140919164217.GD17456@khazad-dum.debian.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20140919164217.GD17456@khazad-dum.debian.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 01:42:17PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> 1. offline a "guinea pig" group of "cpus", i.e. an entire "microcode update
> unit" that doesn't include the BSP.  This is going to be a pain, as what
> composes a "microcode update unit" is not set in stone, and could change in
> a future microarch.

I'm pretty sure it is very dangerous to run with different microcode
revisions on different cores. Your plan won't fly and I have hard time
understanding why one would do such thing even if it did work.

If we're going to have to hide stuff which software might be using, I
don't see a way around rebooting.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--