[arch-releng] [RFC] [PATCH] [configs/releng] Make and use amd_ucode.bin for initrd.

[Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi]

El 23/08/18 a las 06:20, Christian Hesse escribió:
> Christian Hesse <list at eworm.de> on Wed, 2018/08/22 11:24:
>> Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi via arch-releng <arch-releng at archlinux.org> on Sat,
>> 2018/08/18 23:29:
>>> +# Prepare amd_ucode
>>> +make_amd_ucode_img() {
>>> +    mkdir -p ${work_dir}/amd-ucode/kernel/x86/microcode
>>> +    cat
>>> ${work_dir}/x86_64/airootfs/lib/firmware/amd-ucode/microcode_amd*.bin >
>>> ${work_dir}/amd-ucode/kernel/x86/microcode/AuthenticAMD.bin
>>> +    pushd ${work_dir}/amd-ucode > /dev/null
>>> +    echo kernel/x86/microcode/AuthenticAMD.bin | bsdcpio -o -H newc -R
>>> 0:0  
>>>> amd-ucode.img  
>>> +    popd > /dev/null
>>> +    cp ${work_dir}/amd-ucode/amd-ucode.img
>>> ${work_dir}/x86_64/airootfs/boot/amd-ucode.img +}  
>>
>> Wondering if we should put this into a package... Could be a split package
>> of linux-firmware. Any opinion on this?
> 
> [ Added Laurent to CC as he maintains the linux-firmware package. ]
> 
> I've attached a proposal patch to add a split package amd-ucode-early to
> linux-firmware. Any objections? Is the name ok or do we prefer just
> 'amd-ucode'?

amd-ucode is right (like intel-ucode)
missing LICENSE file [#1]

> 
> And another note... Did anybody test if microcode is updated properly if both,
> intel-ucode.img and amd-ucode, are loaded?
> 

At least one feedback from intel user [#2], fw is loaded fine.

Thanks.


[#1] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/59796
[#2] https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/59694#comment172278

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-releng/attachments/20180824/17c0c4ef/attachment.asc>