Re: New format Intel microcode...

[Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>]

> I was mainly concerned with this being a new issue, and curious if 
> Microsoft was calling an O/S bug a "microcode fix," given that the 
> average Windows user doesn't know microcode from nanotech anyway. The 
> non-answer from Arjan didn't answer either, and started by calling the 
> report FUD, implying that Slashdot was wrong (not about this), and 
> issuing so little answer and so much obfuscation that I thought he might 
> be running for President. ;-)

Well you can read the Intel documentation if you want the whole story.
You can hardly expect a full introduction in the basics and then
subtle issues of TLB flushing in a quick email.  You asked about opinions 
and summaries and those you got.

> I'd like the microcode update, 

It's called the "placebo effect" in the literature I believe.

> some people elsewhere speculate that user 
> level code could effect reliability if not security. 

speculate is the key word.

> I worry that an old 
> 2.4 kernel would be an issue, even in kvm, if that were the case.

TLB flushing in virtualization works completely different. I doubt
it would be affected.

-Andi

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/