From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1PfLXk-00068P-HT for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:04:58 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7C66FE0943 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:04:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wy0-f181.google.com (mail-wy0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8160E081C for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 23:09:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyf22 with SMTP id 22so232820wyf.40 for ; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 15:09:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent :references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=7stTkAaaaahUICA2GS82kIfuf6HX86fe1IDgVR9IYCY=; b=wp/+egUVSjIntkoU6i+F+KH07pRLU1WwT1fuaQEP1xgU0nsaLH5jjUDI8KQdn4P+rI cLOrmFq2Y6prWpnfySty1QDh4CJZjwcqA/8NqKg6f7PYpBYogWSLnBppz+RzURR2zwcK eJqWwL+7TB3Lo/bg8+KnMDKoOF1W8JcAK91ro= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; b=CGK4Zd4Jl09H1ofMYKS++B33/JUi+FgOUNRGsk1/7radEMHjcmz7LuTb9hbnbXfY09 ED8l14KB0A68ag/NmznsI1zE4X2hNmMr1NBydhuXEJg8sdguL61sSNZfFiZspFSbAlya 2S9e82E+EG2opImWMi++YNA6aBlNuDBftrm0Y= Received: by 10.227.182.142 with SMTP id cc14mr6302328wbb.215.1295392139199; Tue, 18 Jan 2011 15:08:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from dell_xps.localnet (230.3.169.217.in-addr.arpa [217.169.3.230]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s9sm4056402wby.16.2011.01.18.15.08.57 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 18 Jan 2011 15:08:58 -0800 (PST) From: Mick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Microcode update AMD Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 23:08:45 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.36-gentoo-r5; KDE/4.4.5; x86_64; ; ) References: <20110117172148.GD5748@solfire> <201101182056.22212.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2071378.654tfTCZ11"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201101182309.04719.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 733c523149ccf1d9ddd150921d547ce9 --nextPart2071378.654tfTCZ11 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tuesday 18 January 2011 21:13:49 Paul Hartman wrote: > On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 2:56 PM, Mick wrote: > > On Tuesday 18 January 2011 20:42:05 Paul Hartman wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Mark Knecht =20 wrote: > >> > On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Paul Hartman > >> >=20 > >> > wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Mark Knecht > >=20 > > wrote: > >> >>> OK, I got it to load by hand: > >> >>>=20 > >> >>> 1) emerge microcode-ctl > >> >>>=20 > >> >>> which also emerges microcode-data. Unfortunately microcode-data > >> >>> looks to be out of date. > >> >>=20 > >> >> The ebuild for newer versions (including the latest 20101123) is in > >> >> portage as ~amd64 and ~x86. > >> >=20 > >> > Thanks Paul. > >> >=20 > >> > Also, it does seem to work, for Intel anyway, as a module or built > >> > into the kernel. I chose to build it in as I'm tired of how long lsm= od > >> > is looking these days. > >>=20 > >> If you use the /etc/init.d/microcode_ctl runscript and have > >> MICROCODE_UNLOAD=3D"yes" set in /etc/conf.d/microcode_ctl (which is the > >> default), it will unload the module automatically after it runs, so > >> you shouldn't see it in lsmod anyway, and saves a few kb of memory. > >> But, quite honestly, 8kb of memory is probably inconsequential on a > >> system where microcode_ctl is being used in the first place... :) > >=20 > > Is the /etc/microcode.dat path a bug, now that firmware is typically > > placed in /lib/firmware? > >=20 > > Shall I create a symlink or raise a bug report? >=20 > On my ~amd64 system, using microcode-ctl-1.17-r2 and > microcode-data-20101123 the data is installed to /lib/firmware and the > runscript does: > microcode_ctl -qu -f /lib/firmware/microcode.dat -d ${MICROCODE_DEV} >=20 > I think the gentoo packages are designed for you to use the installed > runscript which works when you use the microcode-data package from > portage since they both use the /lib/firmware location. >=20 > Based on this I would guess that it is not a bug, but that it is the > intended behavior. Yes Paul, you're right. In the days before /lib/firmware was made availabl= e I=20 recall that /etc/microcode.dat was the default location of the code. Now t= hat=20 I just ran it by hand once, it complained that /etc/microcode.dat doesn't=20 exist. =20 However, following your prompt I looked at the /etc/init.d/microcode-ctl=20 script and it all makes sense. =2D-=20 Regards, Mick --nextPart2071378.654tfTCZ11 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk02HZAACgkQVTDTR3kpaLYBtACgycaWKZjSkWe7imGOK/lNl1V8 eiQAoJh9nnLSDtaKEQ88sV8XEpGSXG+q =r0U5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2071378.654tfTCZ11--