Emanuel reported an issue with a hang during microcode update because my
dumb idea to use one atomic synchronization variable for both rendezvous
- before and after update - was simply bollocks:
microcode: microcode_reload_late: late_cpus: 4
microcode: __reload_late: cpu 2 entered
microcode: __reload_late: cpu 1 entered
microcode: __reload_late: cpu 3 entered
microcode: __reload_late: cpu 0 entered
microcode: __reload_late: cpu 1 left
microcode: Timeout while waiting for CPUs rendezvous, remaining: 1
CPU1 above would finish, leave and the others will still spin waiting for
it to join.
So do two synchronization atomics instead, which makes the code a lot more
straightforward.
Also, since the update is serialized and it also takes quite some time per
microcode engine, increase the exit timeout by the number of CPUs on the
system.
That's ok because the moment all CPUs are done, that timeout will be cut
short.
Furthermore, panic when some of the CPUs timeout when returning from a
microcode update: we can't allow a system with not all cores updated.
Also, as an optimization, do not do the exit sync if microcode wasn't
updated.
Reported-by: Emanuel Czirai <xftroxgpx@protonmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Tested-by: Emanuel Czirai <xftroxgpx@protonmail.com>
Tested-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Tested-by: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180314183615.17629-2-bp@alien8.de
bb8c13d61a