Received: by 2002:ad5:474a:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id i10csp2980644imu; Sun, 9 Dec 2018 14:12:14 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/VhPspoju0Tn1n9sAbGBEnPMz1kDAyhp2ns8MHRAUa+QC0HJrs3UzxULSYBUA1Q8iLCLDRh X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:33c2:: with SMTP id b60mr9839053plc.211.1544393534058; Sun, 09 Dec 2018 14:12:14 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1544393534; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=DSLqBmamZynRtksECAeaPh5V2JPVyc9fJvLMkwOSdL6knqd/xDLh5dOuVFZyYO1SI2 kkKz80YQxgX3RY50sFEgQm4WBbg1Y+rEOK4EztfdzeCWBeMysT3MbQUZL7Zl4JkDl8So JURQkheDw/fjVjWRH4V08SdtBPGAMC7PzkXNkh6WX2tkj+aaC+jC2oGbBkgvu2fK+fVM CtsKEe1lC+4EztThNgovmSXcoz3DMLPz3GNDLCM6UNOWwfKH6AgFa1oikDj7d7L/Vsnx tKK1IlycJHQeOTGEnciMFrQGQvIlrKtEbBnX5Kxjp/7PmJB5PjQ/Dl2Opd2cTRv5IMAV HUgg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:in-reply-to:subject:message-id:date:cc:to :from:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; bh=XanYz0/AQJk1CeW/3BcfIuqSr+cr+BButI2NUjkzVqk=; b=i6+u42O8QnRp2W4H1gjmtdNA+wRouwWQKhh+8Ve+LSqtOxTzsct6H+yvVM05Ecu6+n iNLbUIYbxIQLij+ikHqt2RtLUF9WB0Os6+ZF5GYCqwg7Cc0GJ8e3r1OOr5P1eZ8xZPEk SDtDa2xY8Z8QutP6koeFsz/r24NW0RGPF66PN0TkvxoTvxLnoE9gwukSVzlIxvrmO0Rz qf4G85s7qP2LY3fP2Lquor55UPqL5xZ9CKGKe2HAjXj2ggwOzzewMNyNQhLoMXkNmIqU HGmmrQJ9HHUQ+TXAkROhW65OTh3J/rDtyvCX1989AVFlrbd8AekYLyKPhtmJgXQKZ3SN j9NA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id v7si8207635plo.12.2018.12.09.14.11.58; Sun, 09 Dec 2018 14:12:14 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728185AbeLIWKn (ORCPT + 99 others); Sun, 9 Dec 2018 17:10:43 -0500 Received: from shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk ([88.96.1.126]:37590 "EHLO shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727524AbeLIWKm (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Dec 2018 17:10:42 -0500 Received: from pub.yeoldevic.com ([81.174.156.145] helo=deadeye) by shadbolt.decadent.org.uk with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gW738-0002if-HB; Sun, 09 Dec 2018 21:55:43 +0000 Received: from ben by deadeye with local (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from ) id 1gW72f-0003Sa-1a; Sun, 09 Dec 2018 21:55:13 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Ben Hutchings To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org CC: akpm@linux-foundation.org, sironi@amazon.de, "Prarit Bhargava" , "Borislav Petkov" , "Tony Luck" , "Thomas Gleixner" Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2018 21:50:33 +0000 Message-ID: X-Mailer: LinuxStableQueue (scripts by bwh) X-Patchwork-Hint: ignore Subject: [PATCH 3.16 178/328] x86/microcode: Make sure boot_cpu_data.microcode is up-to-date In-Reply-To: X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 81.174.156.145 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ben@decadent.org.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shadbolt.decadent.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 3.16.62-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Prarit Bhargava commit 370a132bb2227ff76278f98370e0e701d86ff752 upstream. 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 Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Tony Luck Cc: sironi@amazon.de Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180731112739.32338-1-prarit@redhat.com [bwh: Backported to 3.16: adjust context] Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings --- arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 4 ++++ arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c | 4 ++++ 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+) --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c @@ -231,6 +231,10 @@ int apply_microcode_amd(int cpu) uci->cpu_sig.rev = mc_amd->hdr.patch_id; c->microcode = mc_amd->hdr.patch_id; + /* Update boot_cpu_data's revision too, if we're on the BSP: */ + if (c->cpu_index == boot_cpu_data.cpu_index) + boot_cpu_data.microcode = mc_amd->hdr.patch_id; + return 0; } --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel.c @@ -188,6 +188,10 @@ int apply_microcode(int cpu) uci->cpu_sig.rev = rev; c->microcode = rev; + /* Update boot_cpu_data's revision too, if we're on the BSP: */ + if (c->cpu_index == boot_cpu_data.cpu_index) + boot_cpu_data.microcode = rev; + return 0; }