| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
toralf
Developer
Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 3922
Location: Hamburg
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:50 pm Post subject: "iucode_tool -S -l ..." advices 2 files |
 |
|
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 |
|
 |
Jaglover
Watchman
Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 8291
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bunder
Bodhisattva
Joined: 10 Apr 2004
Posts: 5934
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
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 |
|
|
toralf
Developer
Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 3922
Location: Hamburg
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
The Main Man
Veteran
Joined: 27 Nov 2014
Posts: 1165
Location: /run/user/1000
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I always thought you should put one that matches signature, no matter the rest on the selected microcodes list. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jaglover
Watchman
Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 8291
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bunder
Bodhisattva
Joined: 10 Apr 2004
Posts: 5934
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 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... 
| 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 |
|
|
Jaglover
Watchman
Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 8291
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bunder
Bodhisattva
Joined: 10 Apr 2004
Posts: 5934
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
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.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aiken
Apprentice
Joined: 22 Jan 2003
Posts: 239
Location: Toowoomba/Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2018 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
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 |
|
|
jasn
Guru
Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 439
Location: Maryland, US
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
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 |
|
|
Jaglover
Watchman
Joined: 29 May 2005
Posts: 8291
Location: Saint Amant, Acadiana
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jasn
Guru
Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 439
Location: Maryland, US
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
BT
Guru
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 318
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
josephg
l33t
Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 783
Location: usually offline
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
BT
Guru
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 318
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
jasn
Guru
Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 439
Location: Maryland, US
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
josephg
l33t
Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 783
Location: usually offline
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
BT
Guru
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 318
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
josephg
l33t
Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 783
Location: usually offline
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
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 |
|
|
|
Networking & Security
