Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: early microcode: how to disable at runtime? | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Date | Mon, 01 Sep 2014 11:48:03 -0700 |
| |
No, it is worse to rename it and have older kernels behave differently. Kernel options are basically super obscure to most people anyway.
On September 1, 2014 10:43:22 AM PDT, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br> wrote: >On Mon, 01 Sep 2014, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 08/31/2014 10:13 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: >> > On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 05:11:26PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes >Holschuh wrote: >> >>> Probably more like something more like arch/x86/boot/cmdline.c. >Maybe >> >>> we could even make it sharable. >> >> >> >> Looks like that would work, yes. >> > >> > Guys, guys, please relax and check the code first: "dis_ucode_ldr". >> > >> >> Yeah. It is an absolutely horrific option name (something like >> "noearlyucode" would have been so much nicer; we generally use the >no- >> prefix and no underscores) but I should have objected to that one >much >> sooner. > >It wasn't properly documented, it is obscure as all heck, and early >microcode updates active by default is a very recent development on >distros. > >You cannot even find "dis_ucode_ldr" being cited by anyone through >google >searches. > >I believe it is actually possible to fix this still: either by directly >renaming, or by using a deprecation period and testing for a new name >and >the "dis_ucode_ldr" name.
-- Sent from my mobile phone. Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.
| |