Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
"iucode_tool -S -l ..." advices 2 files
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

 
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Networking & Security
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
toralf
Developer
Developer


Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 3698
Location: Hamburg

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:50 pm    Post subject: "iucode_tool -S -l ..." advices 2 files Reply with quote

At an i7-3930 I do get
Code:
iucode_tool -S -l /lib/firmware/intel-ucode/*
...
selected microcodes:
  045/001: sig 0x000206d6, pf_mask 0x6d, 2012-05-22, rev 0x0619, size 16384
  046/001: sig 0x000206d7, pf_mask 0x6d, 2013-06-17, rev 0x0710, size 17408
Which is the right one ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jaglover
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 7201
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd use the latter, 046.
_________________
Please learn how to denote units correctly!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bunder
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 10 Apr 2004
Posts: 5866

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I got three for my laptop...

Code:
selected microcodes:
  070/001: sig 0x000906e9, pf_mask 0x2a, 2017-04-06, rev 0x005e, size 97280
  071/001: sig 0x000906ea, pf_mask 0x22, 2017-08-23, rev 0x0070, size 95232
  072/001: sig 0x000906eb, pf_mask 0x02, 2017-09-20, rev 0x0072, size 97280


except 72 doesn't load, so I put all three into the kernel, and found out that 71 doesn't load either. :?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
toralf
Developer
Developer


Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 3698
Location: Hamburg

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 6:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bunder wrote:
so I put all three into the kernel, and found out that 71 doesn't load either. :?
I can only put 1 into it :
Code:
CONFIG_EXTRA_FIRMWARE="intel-ucode/06-45-01"
(no genkernel, no initramfs, straight vanilla kernel)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kajzer
Guru
Guru


Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Posts: 446

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I always thought you should put one that matches signature, no matter the rest on the selected microcodes list.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jaglover
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 7201
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The way I see it all variants listed are for the same CPU, the ones dated later are upgrades, so it makes sense to use the latest.
_________________
Please learn how to denote units correctly!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bunder
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 10 Apr 2004
Posts: 5866

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

toralf wrote:
bunder wrote:
so I put all three into the kernel, and found out that 71 doesn't load either. :?
I can only put 1 into it :
Code:
CONFIG_EXTRA_FIRMWARE="intel-ucode/06-45-01"
(no genkernel, no initramfs, straight vanilla kernel)


you can specify many firmware files, separated by spaces... :wink:

Code:
CONFIG_EXTRA_FIRMWARE="intel-ucode/06-9e-0b intel-ucode/06-9e-0a intel-ucode/06-9e-09 i915/kbl_dmc_ver1.bin i915/kbl_dmc_ver1_01.bin i915/kbl_dmc_ver1_04.bin i915/kbl_guc_ver9_14.bin i915/kbl_guc_ver9_39.bin i915/kbl_huc_ver02_00_1810.bin intel/dsp_fw_kbl.bin intel/dsp_fw_kbl_v2042.bin intel/dsp_fw_kbl_v2630.bin intel/ibt-hw-37.8.bseq intel/ibt-hw-37.8.10-fw-22.50.19.14.f.bseq iwlwifi-3168-21.ucode iwlwifi-3168-22.ucode iwlwifi-3168-27.ucode iwlwifi-3168-29.ucode rtl_nic/rtl8411-1.fw rtl_nic/rtl8411-2.fw"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jaglover
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 7201
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana

PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

^^ True, but why build them all in if only some are used.
_________________
Please learn how to denote units correctly!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bunder
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 10 Apr 2004
Posts: 5866

PostPosted: Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just a quick update, I upgraded to the -r1 bundle and got a new microcode...

Code:
selected microcodes:
  070/001: sig 0x000906e9, pf_mask 0x2a, 2017-12-03, rev 0x007c, size 98304
  071/001: sig 0x000906ea, pf_mask 0x22, 2017-08-23, rev 0x0070, size 95232
  072/001: sig 0x000906eb, pf_mask 0x02, 2017-09-20, rev 0x0072, size 97280


71 and 72 still don't load, but the new 70 seems to get me what I'm after. Not sure why I see the other ones here, pretty sure 70 was the only one I saw in previous versions of intel-microcode.

Quote:
True, but why build them all in if only some are used.


I'll probably take them out if/when I recompile the kernel again now that I know they don't do me any good. 8)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aiken
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 22 Jan 2003
Posts: 221
Location: Toowoomba/Australia

PostPosted: Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The 1st line from iucode_tool shows the signature of the running cpu. Wouldn't you select the file that matches that signature when multiple files are shown?

Code:

~ # iucode_tool -S -l /lib/firmware/intel-ucode/*
iucode_tool: system has processor(s) with signature 0x000906e9
microcode bundle 1: /lib/firmware/intel-ucode/06-03-02
.
.
microcode bundle 94: /lib/firmware/intel-ucode/0f-06-08
selected microcodes:
  070/001: sig 0x000906e9, pf_mask 0x2a, 2017-12-03, rev 0x007c, size 98304
  071/001: sig 0x000906ea, pf_mask 0x22, 2017-08-23, rev 0x0070, size 95232
  072/001: sig 0x000906eb, pf_mask 0x02, 2017-09-20, rev 0x0072, size 97280


This is from a machine that has not been up been updated to sys-firmware/intel-microcode-20180108. The microcode that was used on that computer was the file whose signature matched the cpu signature listed at the top of the iucode_tool output.
_________________
Beware the grue.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jasn
Guru
Guru


Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 439
Location: Maryland, US

PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the same issue with my i7-7700K system. With sys-firmware/intel-microcode-20180108-r1, the iucode_tool identifies three microcodes;
Code:
iucode_tool -S -l /lib/firmware/intel-ucode/*
iucode_tool: system has processor(s) with signature 0x000906e9
[...]
microcode bundle 70: /lib/firmware/intel-ucode/06-9e-09
microcode bundle 71: /lib/firmware/intel-ucode/06-9e-0a
microcode bundle 72: /lib/firmware/intel-ucode/06-9e-0b
[...]
selected microcodes:
  070/001: sig 0x000906e9, pf_mask 0x2a, 2018-01-04, rev 0x0080, size 98304
  071/001: sig 0x000906ea, pf_mask 0x22, 2018-01-04, rev 0x0080, size 97280
  072/001: sig 0x000906eb, pf_mask 0x02, 2018-01-04, rev 0x0080, size 98304

However, if I use
Code:
MICROCODE_SIGNATURES="-s 0x000906e9"

in my /etc/portage/make.conf, reinstalling sys-firmware/intel-microcode only installs;
Code:
-rw-r--r--  1 root root 98304 Jan 14 22:59 06-9e-09

So should I be configuring all three kernel firmware blobs?
Code:
CONFIG_EXTRA_FIRMWARE="intel-ucode/06-9e-09 intel-ucode/06-9e-0a intel-ucode/06-9e-0b"

or just the one?
Code:
CONFIG_EXTRA_FIRMWARE="intel-ucode/06-9e-09"

I've currently got all three configured as in kernel blobs. Does this dmesg output mean that just the intel-ucode/06-9e-09" is loading?
Code:
dmesg |grep microcode
[    0.000000] microcode: microcode updated early to revision 0x80, date = 2018-01-04
[    1.015812] microcode: sig=0x906e9, pf=0x2, revision=0x80
[    1.016617] microcode: Microcode Update Driver: v2.2.


Last edited by jasn on Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:33 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jaglover
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 7201
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana

PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aiken got it right, you need to match the CPU, something I overlooked. Credits go to Aiken!
_________________
Please learn how to denote units correctly!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jasn
Guru
Guru


Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 439
Location: Maryland, US

PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Makes sense to match the signature. I changed my kernel config to load only the one matching firmware blob, and my dmesg output is identical.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BT
Guru
Guru


Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 310

PostPosted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jasn wrote:
However, if I use
Code:
MICROCODE_SIGNATURES="-S0x000906e9"

The correct usage when selecting a specific signature is:
Code:
MICROCODE_SIGNATURES="-s 0x000906e9"

Note the use of the lower case '-s' option.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
josephg
l33t
l33t


Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 783
Location: usually offline

PostPosted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BT wrote:
jasn wrote:
However, if I use
Code:
MICROCODE_SIGNATURES="-S0x000906e9"

The correct usage when selecting a specific signature is:
Code:
MICROCODE_SIGNATURES="-s 0x000906e9"

Note the use of the lower case '-s' option.

i would like more info.. is this documented somewhere?
_________________
"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." Edward Abbey
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BT
Guru
Guru


Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 310

PostPosted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

josephg wrote:
BT wrote:
jasn wrote:
However, if I use
Code:
MICROCODE_SIGNATURES="-S0x000906e9"

The correct usage when selecting a specific signature is:
Code:
MICROCODE_SIGNATURES="-s 0x000906e9"

Note the use of the lower case '-s' option.

i would like more info.. is this documented somewhere?

man iucode_tool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jasn
Guru
Guru


Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 439
Location: Maryland, US

PostPosted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BT wrote:
jasn wrote:
However, if I use
Code:
MICROCODE_SIGNATURES="-S0x000906e9"

The correct usage when selecting a specific signature is:
Code:
MICROCODE_SIGNATURES="-s 0x000906e9"

Note the use of the lower case '-s' option.

Thanks!

This was a forum post mistake on my part. Fixed it now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
josephg
l33t
l33t


Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 783
Location: usually offline

PostPosted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BT wrote:
josephg wrote:
BT wrote:
The correct usage when selecting a specific signature is:
Code:
MICROCODE_SIGNATURES="-s 0x000906e9"

Note the use of the lower case '-s' option.

i would like more info.. is this documented somewhere?

man iucode_tool

i'm asking about MICROCODE_SIGNATURES= in /etc/portage/make.conf
no mention in "man iucode_tool" or "man make.conf"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BT
Guru
Guru


Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 310

PostPosted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 9:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

josephg wrote:
i'm asking about MICROCODE_SIGNATURES= in /etc/portage/make.conf
no mention in "man iucode_tool" or "man make.conf"

MICROCODE_SIGNATURES was introduced with sys-firmware/intel-microcode-20180108-r1. It is documented in the git log, ebuild comments, and the Intel Microcode wiki.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
josephg
l33t
l33t


Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 783
Location: usually offline

PostPosted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BT, thank you for the references. i must've missed this on the wiki.. been on there so many times recently each time new version was released.

i would have expected this package to have a package specific useflag, rather than a global make.conf setting just for one package.. or does this setting affect for than this one package?

also, ebuild says this is sufficient for current cpu
Code:
MICROCODE_SIGNATURES="-S"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Networking & Security All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum