Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: [patch RFC 1/5] x86/CPU: Sync CPU feature flags late
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1801100245010.2200@nanos>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 18:57:32 -0800
Cc: "Van De Ven, Arjan" <arjan.van.de.ven@intel.com>,
        "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Message-Id: <96FD6D6D-4D56-492F-A996-F18F913F5091@amacapital.net>
References: <20180110010652.404145126@linutronix.de> <20180110011350.501418723@linutronix.de> <f70ea6ad-d563-5f60-2657-0551249a70e6@intel.com> <0575AF4FD06DD142AD198903C74E1CC87A571BD8@ORSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1801100245010.2200@nanos>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org


> On Jan 9, 2018, at 5:47 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018, Van De Ven, Arjan wrote:
>>> In other words, if you use late microcode loading for getting IBRS, you
>>> don't get ALTERNATIVE patching and its benefits?
>>> 
>>> I'll also profess some microcode ignorance here.  Is "late microcode
>>> patching" *all* of the stuff we do from the OS, or do we have early and
>>> late Linux loading in addition to what the BIOS can do?
>> 
>> the early boot loader level stuff is much better generally (but does not
>> work when the microcode comes out after the system booted... like really
>> long uptimes)
> 
> That stuff indeed would be way simpler w/o the late support, but the fact
> that the microcode for this might reach the user way later than the kernel
> support makes it almost a must to support the late loading.

How hard would it be to add a late alternative feature?  Concretely, we'd have a list of "late" cpufeatures.  When we scan the alternative list, if we find a late feature, we copy it to some other list that isn't discarded, and we also copy its replacement (and relocate it eagerly, since we'll lose the offset).