[arch-dev-public] Reorganizing CPU ucode updates

Dave Reisner d at falconindy.com
Sun Jan 8 16:05:12 EST 2012

On Sun, Jan 08, 2012 at 09:50:47PM +0100, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> After some talk on IRC with Tom and Dan, I created new ucode packages.
> This is the plan so far:
> 1) Drop microcode_ctl - this Intel-only tool used the microcode.dat file
> provided by Intel to update the ucode.
> 2) Add the split firmware files in /lib/firmware/intel-ucode in a new
> package ([1]).
> 3) Add the AMD firmware file in /lib/firmware/amd-ucode in a new package
> ([2]).
> With this setup, a user simply needs to add the 'microcode' module in
> rc.conf, and the ucode update will be applied automatically. As Tom
> tells me, future linux versions will even autoload microcode when
> appropriate.
> One issue is package naming: We could stick with the usual "source
> tarball == package name" paradigm, but that means that the Intel package
> is named 'microcode', while the AMD package is named 'amd-ucode' (like
> it is commited to SVN now). I would prefer calling the Intel package
> 'intel-ucode', which would be consistent with the AMD version and also
> match the name of the /lib/firmware/ subdirectory.
> Please throw opinions at me.
> [1]
> https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/?h=packages/microcode
> [2]
> https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/tree/trunk/?h=packages/amd-ucode


I opt for consistency -- call the packages amd-ucode and intel-ucode.


More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list