On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 01:29:19PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Sat, 17 Nov 2012, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 06:35:17PM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > > One possibility is that BIOS already incorporated all patches (which > > > typically is the case) and so the driver doesn't have to do anything. > > > > /proc/cpuinfo contains ucode version and the processor's f/m/s, which > > is enough information to tell us whether your old phenom needs ucode > > patching. > > Maybe, however F/M/S information is incomplete, not to mention trying to > rebuild the proper processor signature from it is anything but > forward-proof. For Intel, it is also useless, you also need the processor > flags... > > If /proc/cpuinfo is to be useful for microcode purposes, it should add a > microcode signature line, with CPUID(1).EAX, and on Intel processors, also a > second parameter with the processor flags mask (I don't know if AMD needs > something else other than CPUID(1).EAX).
I was speaking only about that particular case of Gene's AMD CPU. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/