[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#684569: linux-image-3.5-trunk-686-pae: microcode module loaded on Celeron CPU



Am Samstag, den 11.08.2012, 15:12 +0100 schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> On Sat, 2012-08-11 at 15:44 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > Am Samstag, den 11.08.2012, 14:24 +0100 schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> > > On Sat, 2012-08-11 at 15:17 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > > > testing Linux kernel 3.5-1~experimental.1 [1] from Debian experimental I
> > > > > > noticed that the module `microcode` is loaded which has according to
> > > > > > `/var/log/syslog` not been the case with Linux 3.2.y.
> > > > > [...]
> > > > > > So to summarize I think, this module should not be loaded automatically
> > > > > > for this Celeron processor, which is not need for operation.
> > > > > 
> > > > > This really depends on what operations you want to do, and how buggy the
> > > > > CPU microcode installed by the BIOS is.  If you care that much about it,
> > > > > you can blacklist it.
> > > > 
> > > > Understood. Although I do not understand from where the updated
> > > > microcode is fetched. The only way for desktop users were BIOS upgrades
> > > > if I remember correctly. Linux does not ship the microcode, does not it.
> > > [...]
> > > 
> > > It's packaged in ia32-microcode (and amd64-microcode)
> > 
> > Hmm, no microcode packages are installed on my systems. (Which seems to
> > be a bad thing.)
> > 
> >         $ aptitude search microcode
> >         p   amd64-microcode                                               - Processor microcode firmware for AMD CPUs                               
> >         p   intel-microcode                                               - Processor microcode firmware for Intel CPUs
> > 
> > My point is that if you do not have these microcode packages installed,
> > and if they are not installed automatically most users will not do so,
> > then loading the microcode module/driver does not have any effect.
> > 
> > > and I believe it can be loaded by udev now.
> > 
> > Should not be udev also responsible for loading the necessary modules
> > then?
> 
> It is.

Sorry for being dumb. But why is needed now that the module
automatically/unconditionally loads?

> > Another solution would be that the packages shipping microcodes should
> > also ship an appropriate `/etc/modprobe.d/microcode.conf` file to load
> > the module.


Thanks and sorry for my ignorance,

Paul

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: