Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.33 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.33;
Date:   Wed, 27 Sep 2023 19:17:13 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86@kernel.org,
        "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
        Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [patch V3 25/30] x86/microcode: Rendezvous and load in NMI
Message-ID: <20230927171713.GBZRRjmUDQrV9HVxv-@fat_crate.local>
References: <20230912065249.695681286@linutronix.de>
 <20230912065502.327149876@linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230912065502.327149876@linutronix.de>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 09:58:23AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> 
> 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 NOOPed except when enabled by the late loading mechanism.
>
> The later loader enables the static branch before stop_machine() is

s/later/late/

> 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 makes sense.

Huh? "where it makes sense"?

> -static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void *unused)
> +static bool microcode_update_handler(void)
>  {
>  	unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
>  
> @@ -430,7 +436,29 @@ static int ucode_load_cpus_stopped(void
>  	else
>  		ucode_load_secondary(cpu);
>  
> -	/* No point to wait here. The CPUs will all wait in stop_machine(). */
> +	touch_nmi_watchdog();

AFAICT, you're touching the NMI watchdog even in the !use_nmi case.

> +	return true;
> +}

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette