On 01/22/18 09:08, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 01/18/2018 09:42 AM, Valeri Galtsev wrote: >> >> >> On 01/18/18 03:41, Pete Biggs wrote: >>> >>>> Look at: >>>> >>>> https://t.co/6fT61xgtGH >>>> >>>> Get the latest microcode.dat file from here: >>>> >>>> https://t.co/zPwagbeJFY >>>> >>>> See how to update the microcode from the links at the bottom of this >>>> page: >>>> >>>> https://t.co/EOgclWdHCw >>>> >>>> An before anyone asks .. I have no idea why Red Hat chose this path, >>>> they did. It doesn't matter if I (or anyone else) agrees with the >>>> decision. It is what it is. >>>> >>> **I'm not blaming you.** >>> >>> But can I just clarify. We have to *manually* install the microcode >>> update an EL7 in order to be protected against Spectre? EL6 as well? >>> >>> Presumably this is to remove RH from the loop and to stop people >>> blaming them - i.e. this is between Intel and the customer, it's >>> nothing to do with them. >> >> I bet you are right. I was going to rant about that... then it occurred >> to me that class action against Intel (didn't hear about AMD though) is >> quite likely, so, indeed, RedHat does not want to be even mentioned in >> it, which will be unfair, especially after RedHat putting effort into >> fixing somebody's else crap. >> > > It isn't about washing hands, lawsuits, or soeoen else's stuff. It is > about broken microcode updates. > > The code from intel was broken .. causing several CPUs not to boot after > update. That (and only that) is why they were pulled. > > Users MUST individually QA the microcode for their individual CPUs, OEM > Frimware, chipset etc. > > The issue here is that the microcode broke peoples machines .. therefore > it had to be rolled back. All the other discussion is full and total BS. > > It is likely ONCE all the microcode updates are tested and completely > working that Red Hat will again include it in the microcode_ctl RPM .. > but that can't put stuff in there that is breaking machines. > > While things are beuing released as QA quality, they are going to have > to be done individually by admins .. that's just how it is. > Thanks Johnny, for correcting my wild guess which was wrong, and the fact that my guess was wrong I realized after reading your other post! As with everything else the end user pays one way or another. :-( Valeri ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Valeri Galtsev Sr System Administrator Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics University of Chicago Phone: 773-702-4247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++