summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2024-04-29x86/microcode/intel: Switch to new Intel CPU model definesTony Luck
New CPU #defines encode vendor and family as well as model. Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240424181513.41829-1-tony.luck%40intel.com
2024-02-16x86/cpu/topology: Get rid of cpuinfo::x86_max_coresThomas Gleixner
Now that __num_cores_per_package and __num_threads_per_package are available, cpuinfo::x86_max_cores and the related math all over the place can be replaced with the ready to consume data. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Tested-by: Michael Kelley <mhklinux@outlook.com> Tested-by: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240213210253.176147806@linutronix.de
2023-12-03x86/microcode/intel: Set new revision only after a successful updateBorislav Petkov (AMD)
This was meant to be done only when early microcode got updated successfully. Move it into the if-branch. Also, make sure the current revision is read unconditionally and only once. Fixes: 080990aa3344 ("x86/microcode: Rework early revisions reporting") Reported-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Tested-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/ZWjVt5dNRjbcvlzR@a4bf019067fa.jf.intel.com
2023-12-01x86/microcode/intel: Remove redundant microcode late updated messageAshok Raj
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
2023-11-21x86/microcode: Rework early revisions reportingBorislav Petkov (AMD)
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
2023-10-24x86/microcode/intel: Add a minimum required revision for late loadingAshok Raj
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
2023-10-24x86/microcode: Prepare for minimal revision checkThomas Gleixner
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
2023-10-24x86/microcode: Rendezvous and load in NMIThomas Gleixner
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
2023-10-24x86/microcode/intel: Rework intel_find_matching_signature()Thomas Gleixner
Take a cpu_signature argument and work from there. Move the match() helper next to the callsite as there is no point for having it in a header. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231002115902.797820205@linutronix.de
2023-10-24x86/microcode/intel: Reuse intel_cpu_collect_info()Thomas Gleixner
No point for an almost duplicate function. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231002115902.741173606@linutronix.de
2023-10-24x86/microcode/intel: Rework intel_cpu_collect_info()Thomas Gleixner
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
2023-10-24x86/microcode/intel: Unify microcode apply() functionsThomas Gleixner
Deduplicate the early and late apply() functions. [ bp: Rename the function which does the actual application to __apply_microcode() to differentiate it from microcode_ops.apply_microcode(). ] Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231017211722.795508212@linutronix.de
2023-10-24x86/microcode/intel: Switch to kvmalloc()Thomas Gleixner
Microcode blobs are getting larger and might soon reach the kmalloc() limit. Switch over kvmalloc(). Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231002115902.564323243@linutronix.de
2023-10-24x86/microcode/intel: Save the microcode only after a successful late-loadThomas Gleixner
There are situations where the late microcode is loaded into memory but is not applied: 1) The rendezvous fails 2) The microcode is rejected by the CPUs If any of this happens then the pointer which was updated at firmware load time is stale and subsequent CPU hotplug operations either fail to update or create inconsistent microcode state. Save the loaded microcode in a separate pointer before the late load is attempted and when successful, update the hotplug pointer accordingly via a new microcode_ops callback. Remove the pointless fallback in the loader to a microcode pointer which is never populated. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231002115902.505491309@linutronix.de
2023-10-24x86/microcode/intel: Simplify early loadingThomas Gleixner
The early loading code is overly complicated: - It scans the builtin/initrd for microcode not only on the BSP, but also on all APs during early boot and then later in the boot process it scans again to duplicate and save the microcode before initrd goes away. That's a pointless exercise because this can be simply done before bringing up the APs when the memory allocator is up and running. - Saving the microcode from within the scan loop is completely non-obvious and a left over of the microcode cache. This can be done at the call site now which makes it obvious. Rework the code so that only the BSP scans the builtin/initrd microcode once during early boot and save it away in an early initcall for later use. [ bp: Test and fold in a fix from tglx ontop which handles the need to distinguish what save_microcode() does depending on when it is called: - when on the BSP during early load, it needs to find a newer revision than the one currently loaded on the BSP - later, before SMP init, it still runs on the BSP and gets the BSP revision just loaded and uses that revision to know which patch to save for the APs. For that it needs to find the exact one as on the BSP. ] Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231017211722.629085215@linutronix.de
2023-10-19x86/microcode/intel: Cleanup code furtherThomas Gleixner
Sanitize the microcode scan loop, fixup printks and move the loading function for builtin microcode next to the place where it is used and mark it __init. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231002115902.389400871@linutronix.de
2023-10-19x86/microcode/intel: Simplify and rename generic_load_microcode()Thomas Gleixner
so it becomes less obfuscated and rename it because there is nothing generic about it. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231002115902.330295409@linutronix.de
2023-10-19x86/microcode/intel: Simplify scan_microcode()Thomas Gleixner
Make it readable and comprehensible. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231002115902.271940980@linutronix.de
2023-10-19x86/microcode/intel: Rip out mixed stepping support for Intel CPUsAshok Raj
Mixed steppings aren't supported on Intel CPUs. Only one microcode patch is required for the entire system. The caching of microcode blobs which match the family and model is therefore pointless and in fact is dysfunctional as CPU hotplug updates use only a single microcode blob, i.e. the one where *intel_ucode_patch points to. Remove the microcode cache and make it an AMD local feature. [ tglx: - save only at the end. Otherwise random microcode ends up in the pointer for early loading - free the ucode patch pointer in save_microcode_patch() only after kmemdup() has succeeded, as reported by Andrew Cooper ] Originally-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/20231017211722.404362809@linutronix.de
2023-10-18x86/microcode/32: Move early loading after paging enableThomas Gleixner
32-bit loads microcode before paging is enabled. The commit which introduced that has zero justification in the changelog. The cover letter has slightly more content, but it does not give any technical justification either: "The problem in current microcode loading method is that we load a microcode way, way too late; ideally we should load it before turning paging on. This may only be practical on 32 bits since we can't get to 64-bit mode without paging on, but we should still do it as early as at all possible." Handwaving word salad with zero technical content. Someone claimed in an offlist conversation that this is required for curing the ATOM erratum AAE44/AAF40/AAG38/AAH41. That erratum requires an microcode update in order to make the usage of PSE safe. But during early boot, PSE is completely irrelevant and it is evaluated way later. Neither is it relevant for the AP on single core HT enabled CPUs as the microcode loading on the AP is not doing anything. On dual core CPUs there is a theoretical problem if a split of an executable large page between enabling paging including PSE and loading the microcode happens. But that's only theoretical, it's practically irrelevant because the affected dual core CPUs are 64bit enabled and therefore have paging and PSE enabled before loading the microcode on the second core. So why would it work on 64-bit but not on 32-bit? The erratum: "AAG38 Code Fetch May Occur to Incorrect Address After a Large Page is Split Into 4-Kbyte Pages Problem: If software clears the PS (page size) bit in a present PDE (page directory entry), that will cause linear addresses mapped through this PDE to use 4-KByte pages instead of using a large page after old TLB entries are invalidated. Due to this erratum, if a code fetch uses this PDE before the TLB entry for the large page is invalidated then it may fetch from a different physical address than specified by either the old large page translation or the new 4-KByte page translation. This erratum may also cause speculative code fetches from incorrect addresses." The practical relevance for this is exactly zero because there is no splitting of large text pages during early boot-time, i.e. between paging enable and microcode loading, and neither during CPU hotplug. IOW, this load microcode before paging enable is yet another voodoo programming solution in search of a problem. What's worse is that it causes at least two serious problems: 1) When stackprotector is enabled, the microcode loader code has the stackprotector mechanics enabled. The read from the per CPU variable __stack_chk_guard is always accessing the virtual address either directly on UP or via %fs on SMP. In physical address mode this results in an access to memory above 3GB. So this works by chance as the hardware returns the same value when there is no RAM at this physical address. When there is RAM populated above 3G then the read is by chance the same as nothing changes that memory during the very early boot stage. That's not necessarily true during runtime CPU hotplug. 2) When function tracing is enabled, the relevant microcode loader functions and the functions invoked from there will call into the tracing code and evaluate global and per CPU variables in physical address mode. What could potentially go wrong? Cure this and move the microcode loading after the early paging enable, use the new temporary initrd mapping and remove the gunk in the microcode loader which is required to handle physical address mode. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231017211722.348298216@linutronix.de
2023-08-13x86/microcode/intel: Remove pointless mutexThomas Gleixner
There is no concurrency. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230812195728.069849788@linutronix.de
2023-08-13x86/microcode/intel: Remove debug codeThomas Gleixner
This is really of dubious value. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230812195728.010895747@linutronix.de
2023-08-13x86/microcode: Move core specific defines to local headerThomas Gleixner
There is no reason to expose all of this globally. Move everything which is not required outside of the microcode specific code to local header files and into the respective source files. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230812195727.952876381@linutronix.de
2023-08-13x86/microcode/intel: Rename get_datasize() since its used externallyAshok Raj
Rename get_datasize() to intel_microcode_get_datasize() and make it an inline. [ tglx: Make the argument typed and fix up the IFS code ] Suggested-by: Boris Petkov <bp@alien8.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/20230812195727.894165745@linutronix.de
2023-08-13x86/microcode: Include vendor headers into microcode.hAshok Raj
Currently vendor specific headers are included explicitly when used in common code. Instead, include the vendor specific headers in microcode.h, and include that in all usages. No functional change. Suggested-by: Boris Petkov <bp@alien8.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/20230812195727.776541545@linutronix.de
2023-08-13x86/microcode/intel: Move microcode functions out of cpu/intel.cThomas Gleixner
There is really no point to have that in the CPUID evaluation code. Move it into the Intel-specific microcode handling along with the data structures, defines and helpers required by it. The exports need to stay for IFS. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230812195727.719202319@linutronix.de
2023-01-21x86/microcode/intel: Print old and new revision during early bootAshok Raj
Make early loading message match late loading message and print both old and new revisions. This is helpful to know what the BIOS loaded revision is before an early update. Cache the early BIOS revision before the microcode update and have print_ucode_info() print both the old and new revision in the same format as microcode_reload_late(). [ bp: Massage, remove useless comment. ] Signed-off-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230120161923.118882-6-ashok.raj@intel.com
2023-01-21x86/microcode/intel: Pass the microcode revision to print_ucode_info() directlyAshok Raj
print_ucode_info() takes a struct ucode_cpu_info pointer as parameter. Its sole purpose is to print the microcode revision. The only available ucode_cpu_info always describes the currently loaded microcode revision. After a microcode update is successful, this is the new revision, or on failure it is the original revision. In preparation for future changes, replace the struct ucode_cpu_info pointer parameter with a plain integer which contains the revision number and adjust the call sites accordingly. No functional change. [ bp: - Fix + cleanup commit message. - Revert arbitrary, unrelated change. ] Signed-off-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230120161923.118882-5-ashok.raj@intel.com
2022-12-13Merge tag 'x86_microcode_for_v6.2' of ↵Linus Torvalds
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip Pull x86 microcode and IFS updates from Borislav Petkov: "The IFS (In-Field Scan) stuff goes through tip because the IFS driver uses the same structures and similar functionality as the microcode loader and it made sense to route it all through this branch so that there are no conflicts. - Add support for multiple testing sequences to the Intel In-Field Scan driver in order to be able to run multiple different test patterns. Rework things and remove the BROKEN dependency so that the driver can be enabled (Jithu Joseph) - Remove the subsys interface usage in the microcode loader because it is not really needed - A couple of smaller fixes and cleanups" * tag 'x86_microcode_for_v6.2' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: (24 commits) x86/microcode/intel: Do not retry microcode reloading on the APs x86/microcode/intel: Do not print microcode revision and processor flags platform/x86/intel/ifs: Add missing kernel-doc entry Revert "platform/x86/intel/ifs: Mark as BROKEN" Documentation/ABI: Update IFS ABI doc platform/x86/intel/ifs: Add current_batch sysfs entry platform/x86/intel/ifs: Remove reload sysfs entry platform/x86/intel/ifs: Add metadata validation platform/x86/intel/ifs: Use generic microcode headers and functions platform/x86/intel/ifs: Add metadata support x86/microcode/intel: Use a reserved field for metasize x86/microcode/intel: Add hdr_type to intel_microcode_sanity_check() x86/microcode/intel: Reuse microcode_sanity_check() x86/microcode/intel: Use appropriate type in microcode_sanity_check() x86/microcode/intel: Reuse find_matching_signature() platform/x86/intel/ifs: Remove memory allocation from load path platform/x86/intel/ifs: Remove image loading during init platform/x86/intel/ifs: Return a more appropriate error code platform/x86/intel/ifs: Remove unused selection x86/microcode: Drop struct ucode_cpu_info.valid ...
2022-12-05x86/microcode/intel: Do not retry microcode reloading on the APsAshok Raj
The retries in load_ucode_intel_ap() were in place to support systems with mixed steppings. Mixed steppings are no longer supported and there is only one microcode image at a time. Any retries will simply reattempt to apply the same image over and over without making progress. [ bp: Zap the circumstantial reasoning from the commit message. ] Fixes: 06b8534cb728 ("x86/microcode: Rework microcode loading") Signed-off-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221129210832.107850-3-ashok.raj@intel.com
2022-12-03x86/microcode/intel: Do not print microcode revision and processor flagsAshok Raj
collect_cpu_info() is used to collect the current microcode revision and processor flags on every CPU. It had a weird mechanism to try to mimick a "once" functionality in the sense that, that information should be issued only when it is differing from the previous CPU. However (1): the new calling sequence started doing that in parallel: microcode_init() |-> schedule_on_each_cpu(setup_online_cpu) |-> collect_cpu_info() resulting in multiple redundant prints: microcode: sig=0x50654, pf=0x80, revision=0x2006e05 microcode: sig=0x50654, pf=0x80, revision=0x2006e05 microcode: sig=0x50654, pf=0x80, revision=0x2006e05 However (2): dumping this here is not that important because the kernel does not support mixed silicon steppings microcode. Finally! Besides, there is already a pr_info() in microcode_reload_late() that shows both the old and new revisions. What is more, the CPU signature (sig=0x50654) and Processor Flags (pf=0x80) above aren't that useful to the end user, they are available via /proc/cpuinfo and they don't change anyway. Remove the redundant pr_info(). [ bp: Heavily massage. ] Fixes: b6f86689d5b7 ("x86/microcode: Rip out the subsys interface gunk") Reported-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221103175901.164783-2-ashok.raj@intel.com
2022-11-25use less confusing names for iov_iter direction initializersAl Viro
READ/WRITE proved to be actively confusing - the meanings are "data destination, as used with read(2)" and "data source, as used with write(2)", but people keep interpreting those as "we read data from it" and "we write data to it", i.e. exactly the wrong way. Call them ITER_DEST and ITER_SOURCE - at least that is harder to misinterpret... Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2022-11-18x86/microcode/intel: Add hdr_type to intel_microcode_sanity_check()Jithu Joseph
IFS test images and microcode blobs use the same header format. Microcode blobs use header type of 1, whereas IFS test images will use header type of 2. In preparation for IFS reusing intel_microcode_sanity_check(), add header type as a parameter for sanity check. [ bp: Touchups. ] Signed-off-by: Jithu Joseph <jithu.joseph@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221117035935.4136738-9-jithu.joseph@intel.com
2022-11-18x86/microcode/intel: Reuse microcode_sanity_check()Jithu Joseph
IFS test image carries the same microcode header as regular Intel microcode blobs. Reuse microcode_sanity_check() in the IFS driver to perform sanity check of the IFS test images too. Signed-off-by: Jithu Joseph <jithu.joseph@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221117035935.4136738-8-jithu.joseph@intel.com
2022-11-18x86/microcode/intel: Use appropriate type in microcode_sanity_check()Jithu Joseph
The data type of the @print_err parameter used by microcode_sanity_check() is int. In preparation for exporting this function to be used by the IFS driver convert it to a more appropriate bool type for readability. No functional change intended. Suggested-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Jithu Joseph <jithu.joseph@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221117035935.4136738-7-jithu.joseph@intel.com
2022-11-18x86/microcode/intel: Reuse find_matching_signature()Jithu Joseph
IFS uses test images provided by Intel that can be regarded as firmware. An IFS test image carries microcode header with an extended signature table. Reuse find_matching_signature() for verifying if the test image header or the extended signature table indicate whether that image is fit to run on a system. No functional changes. Signed-off-by: Jithu Joseph <jithu.joseph@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221117035935.4136738-6-jithu.joseph@intel.com
2022-11-02x86/microcode: Kill refresh_fwBorislav Petkov
request_microcode_fw() can always request firmware now so drop this superfluous argument. Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221028142638.28498-4-bp@alien8.de
2022-08-26x86/microcode: Remove ->request_microcode_user()Borislav Petkov
181b6f40e9ea ("x86/microcode: Rip out the OLD_INTERFACE") removed the old microcode loading interface but forgot to remove the related ->request_microcode_user() functionality which it uses. Rip it out now too. Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220825075445.28171-1-bp@alien8.de
2022-05-12x86/microcode/intel: Expose collect_cpu_info_early() for IFSJithu Joseph
IFS is a CPU feature that allows a binary blob, similar to microcode, to be loaded and consumed to perform low level validation of CPU circuitry. In fact, it carries the same Processor Signature (family/model/stepping) details that are contained in Intel microcode blobs. In support of an IFS driver to trigger loading, validation, and running of these tests blobs, make the functionality of cpu_signatures_match() and collect_cpu_info_early() available outside of the microcode driver. Add an "intel_" prefix and drop the "_early" suffix from collect_cpu_info_early() and EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() it. Add declaration to x86 <asm/cpu.h> Make cpu_signatures_match() an inline function in x86 <asm/cpu.h>, and also give it an "intel_" prefix. No functional change intended. Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Jithu Joseph <jithu.joseph@intel.com> Co-developed-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Acked-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220506225410.1652287-2-tony.luck@intel.com Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
2021-10-22x86/microcode: Use the firmware_loader built-in APIBorislav Petkov
The microcode loader has been looping through __start_builtin_fw down to __end_builtin_fw to look for possibly built-in firmware for microcode updates. Now that the firmware loader code has exported an API for looping through the kernel's built-in firmware section, use it and drop the x86 implementation in favor. Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211021155843.1969401-4-mcgrof@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2020-11-17x86/microcode/intel: Check patch signature before saving microcode for early ↵Chen Yu
loading Currently, scan_microcode() leverages microcode_matches() to check if the microcode matches the CPU by comparing the family and model. However, the processor stepping and flags of the microcode signature should also be considered when saving a microcode patch for early update. Use find_matching_signature() in scan_microcode() and get rid of the now-unused microcode_matches() which is a good cleanup in itself. Complete the verification of the patch being saved for early loading in save_microcode_patch() directly. This needs to be done there too because save_mc_for_early() will call save_microcode_patch() too. The second reason why this needs to be done is because the loader still tries to support, at least hypothetically, mixed-steppings systems and thus adds all patches to the cache that belong to the same CPU model albeit with different steppings. For example: microcode: CPU: sig=0x906ec, pf=0x2, rev=0xd6 microcode: mc_saved[0]: sig=0x906e9, pf=0x2a, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19400, date = 2020-04-23 microcode: mc_saved[1]: sig=0x906ea, pf=0x22, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19000, date = 2020-04-27 microcode: mc_saved[2]: sig=0x906eb, pf=0x2, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19400, date = 2020-04-23 microcode: mc_saved[3]: sig=0x906ec, pf=0x22, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19000, date = 2020-04-27 microcode: mc_saved[4]: sig=0x906ed, pf=0x22, rev=0xd6, total size=0x19400, date = 2020-04-23 The patch which is being saved for early loading, however, can only be the one which fits the CPU this runs on so do the signature verification before saving. [ bp: Do signature verification in save_microcode_patch() and rewrite commit message. ] Fixes: ec400ddeff20 ("x86/microcode_intel_early.c: Early update ucode on Intel's CPU") Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=208535 Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201113015923.13960-1-yu.c.chen@intel.com
2019-10-01x86/microcode/intel: Issue the revision updated message only on the BSPBorislav Petkov
... in order to not pollute dmesg with a line for each updated microcode engine. Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Cc: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> Cc: Jon Grimm <Jon.Grimm@amd.com> Cc: kanth.ghatraju@oracle.com Cc: konrad.wilk@oracle.com Cc: Mihai Carabas <mihai.carabas@oracle.com> Cc: patrick.colp@oracle.com Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> Cc: x86-ml <x86@kernel.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190824085341.GC16813@zn.tnic
2019-05-30treewide: Replace GPLv2 boilerplate/reference with SPDX - rule 152Thomas Gleixner
Based on 1 normalized pattern(s): this program is free software you can redistribute it and or modify it under the terms of the gnu general public license as published by the free software foundation either version 2 of the license or at your option any later version extracted by the scancode license scanner the SPDX license identifier GPL-2.0-or-later has been chosen to replace the boilerplate/reference in 3029 file(s). Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Allison Randal <allison@lohutok.net> Cc: linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190527070032.746973796@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2019-04-10x86/microcode/intel: Refactor Intel microcode blob loadingJann Horn
Change generic_load_microcode() to use the iov_iter API instead of a clumsy open-coded version which has to pay attention to __user data or kernel data, depending on the loading method. This allows to avoid explicit casting between user and kernel pointers. Because the iov_iter API makes it hard to read the same location twice, as a side effect, also fix a double-read of the microcode header (which could e.g. lead to out-of-bounds reads in microcode_sanity_check()). Not that it matters much, only root is allowed to load microcode anyway... [ bp: Massage a bit, sort function-local variables. ] Signed-off-by: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> Cc: x86-ml <x86@kernel.org> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190404111128.131157-1-jannh@google.com
2018-09-02x86/microcode: Update the new microcode revision unconditionallyFilippo Sironi
Handle the case where microcode gets loaded on the BSP's hyperthread sibling first and the boot_cpu_data's microcode revision doesn't get updated because of early exit due to the siblings sharing a microcode engine. For that, simply write the updated revision on all CPUs unconditionally. Signed-off-by: Filippo Sironi <sironi@amazon.de> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: prarit@redhat.com Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1533050970-14385-1-git-send-email-sironi@amazon.de
2018-09-02x86/microcode: Make sure boot_cpu_data.microcode is up-to-datePrarit Bhargava
When preparing an MCE record for logging, boot_cpu_data.microcode is used to read out the microcode revision on the box. However, on systems where late microcode update has happened, the microcode revision output in a MCE log record is wrong because boot_cpu_data.microcode is not updated when the microcode gets updated. But, the microcode revision saved in boot_cpu_data's microcode member should be kept up-to-date, regardless, for consistency. Make it so. Fixes: fa94d0c6e0f3 ("x86/MCE: Save microcode revision in machine check records") Signed-off-by: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> Cc: sironi@amazon.de Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180731112739.32338-1-prarit@redhat.com
2018-06-22x86/microcode/intel: Fix memleak in save_microcode_patch()Zhenzhong Duan
Free useless ucode_patch entry when it's replaced. [ bp: Drop the memfree_patch() two-liner. ] Signed-off-by: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Srinivas REDDY Eeda <srinivas.eeda@oracle.com> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/888102f0-fd22-459d-b090-a1bd8a00cb2b@default
2018-04-24x86/microcode/intel: Save microcode patch unconditionallyBorislav Petkov
save_mc_for_early() was a no-op on !CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU but the generic_load_microcode() path saves the microcode patches it has found into the cache of patches which is used for late loading too. Regardless of whether CPU hotplug is used or not. Make the saving unconditional so that late loading can find the proper patch. Reported-by: Vitezslav Samel <vitezslav@samel.cz> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Tested-by: Vitezslav Samel <vitezslav@samel.cz> Tested-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180418081140.GA2439@pc11.op.pod.cz Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180421081930.15741-1-bp@alien8.de
2018-03-16x86/microcode: Attempt late loading only when new microcode is presentBorislav Petkov
Return UCODE_NEW from the scanning functions to denote that new microcode was found and only then attempt the expensive synchronization dance. Reported-by: Emanuel Czirai <xftroxgpx@protonmail.com> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Tested-by: Emanuel Czirai <xftroxgpx@protonmail.com> Tested-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Tested-by: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180314183615.17629-1-bp@alien8.de
2018-03-08x86/microcode/intel: Look into the patch cache firstBorislav Petkov
The cache might contain a newer patch - look in there first. A follow-on change will make sure newest patches are loaded into the cache of microcode patches. Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Tested-by: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> Tested-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com> Cc: Arjan Van De Ven <arjan.van.de.ven@intel.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180228102846.13447-6-bp@alien8.de