Re: [PATCH 13/13] x86/microcode/intel: Fix printing of microcode blobs in show_saved_mc()

2015-02-25 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:41:25AM +0100, Quentin Casasnovas wrote: > Yup that's how I understood your patchset :) If I may though, I think the > issue I raised on your patch 8 is serious enough to get a fix before you > merge this patchset - it should just be a matter of adding some parentheses

Re: [PATCH 13/13] x86/microcode/intel: Fix printing of microcode blobs in show_saved_mc()

2015-02-25 Thread Quentin Casasnovas
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 05:48:17PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > Thanks for the review, very good points. I had spotted some of them > myself but had to restrain myself not to do them now for the very > simple reason: we want this code first cleaned up nicely, in small and > self-contained

Re: [PATCH 13/13] x86/microcode/intel: Fix printing of microcode blobs in show_saved_mc()

2015-02-25 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:41:25AM +0100, Quentin Casasnovas wrote: Yup that's how I understood your patchset :) If I may though, I think the issue I raised on your patch 8 is serious enough to get a fix before you merge this patchset - it should just be a matter of adding some parentheses at

Re: [PATCH 13/13] x86/microcode/intel: Fix printing of microcode blobs in show_saved_mc()

2015-02-25 Thread Quentin Casasnovas
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 05:48:17PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: Thanks for the review, very good points. I had spotted some of them myself but had to restrain myself not to do them now for the very simple reason: we want this code first cleaned up nicely, in small and self-contained pieces

Re: [PATCH 13/13] x86/microcode/intel: Fix printing of microcode blobs in show_saved_mc()

2015-02-24 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 05:24:27PM +0100, Quentin Casasnovas wrote: > Hmm I might be completely wrong but I thought the whole point of pr_debug() > was to have something dynamic at runtime as opposed to compiled in? What > am I missing? That's the CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG case. But the functionality

Re: [PATCH 13/13] x86/microcode/intel: Fix printing of microcode blobs in show_saved_mc()

2015-02-24 Thread Quentin Casasnovas
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:37:12AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > While at it, make pr_* stuff use "microcode: " prefix for easier > grepping and document how to enable the DEBUG build. > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel_early.c > @@ -16,6 +16,14 @@ > * as published by the Free

[PATCH 13/13] x86/microcode/intel: Fix printing of microcode blobs in show_saved_mc()

2015-02-24 Thread Borislav Petkov
From: Borislav Petkov When doing echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/microcode/reload in order to reload microcode, I get: microcode: Total microcode saved: 1 BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [] code: bash/2606 caller is debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x20 CPU: 1 PID:

[PATCH 13/13] x86/microcode/intel: Fix printing of microcode blobs in show_saved_mc()

2015-02-24 Thread Borislav Petkov
From: Borislav Petkov b...@suse.de When doing echo 1 /sys/devices/system/cpu/microcode/reload in order to reload microcode, I get: microcode: Total microcode saved: 1 BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [] code: bash/2606 caller is debug_smp_processor_id+0x17/0x20

Re: [PATCH 13/13] x86/microcode/intel: Fix printing of microcode blobs in show_saved_mc()

2015-02-24 Thread Quentin Casasnovas
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:37:12AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: While at it, make pr_* stuff use microcode: prefix for easier grepping and document how to enable the DEBUG build. +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel_early.c @@ -16,6 +16,14 @@ * as published by the Free Software

Re: [PATCH 13/13] x86/microcode/intel: Fix printing of microcode blobs in show_saved_mc()

2015-02-24 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 05:24:27PM +0100, Quentin Casasnovas wrote: Hmm I might be completely wrong but I thought the whole point of pr_debug() was to have something dynamic at runtime as opposed to compiled in? What am I missing? That's the CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG case. But the functionality