From owner-freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Mon Nov 23 04:53:33 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45703A35554; Mon, 23 Nov 2015 04:53:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from grarpamp@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ig0-x232.google.com (mail-ig0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AD70142B; Mon, 23 Nov 2015 04:53:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from grarpamp@gmail.com) Received: by igvg19 with SMTP id g19so66553709igv.1; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 20:53:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=4bkAoo+DDlnBT/hSar99O3RTZLUqsMxW06U2keNhyrI=; b=Vhkdopiymao8LHim7kfm6SLFaxDbvRpVPJDzDUVlzCuN/0mqUpCn4RoYUSuXetMOj3 JtcC88Mro/mXm9EZdRVDWo1Ty7fTpyYiWZ6kUaNYrYd78JRVlZ2b9qncz8lM5H7bhKO8 cP9x6mTgtMHSSUsHorRUrfROTa9JXq7CHaw5l9BTPAfVdnAIcs/JVpWblpJXF3zocu0Y Bi5UCeFT+I4XgQiImCDAl3/4UvblIOKuP0EnsSFPzxzsovpg6g1yxP2GXTh1GjX71wBc xzCuwIoasU/T8qX1zjuWAqQCxHYqdmcJwyp7c4MStBWlDmV8tDz6O09NgqqIE4DdJVvU Ngtw== X-Received: by 10.50.79.129 with SMTP id j1mr11529433igx.52.1448254412453; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 20:53:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.36.137.197 with HTTP; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 20:52:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <564F3FBF.8050603@gmail.com> References: <564F3FBF.8050603@gmail.com> From: grarpamp Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 23:52:53 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Is processor microcode advised? To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 04:53:33 -0000 On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Will Senn wrote: > sudo /usr/sbin/cpucontrol -v -u -d "/usr/local/share/cpucontrol/" > /dev/cpuctl0 > cpucontrol: skipping /usr/local/share/cpucontrol//m101067770A.fw of rev > 0x70a: up to date > What I infer from this is that my CPU's are already as up to date as the > microcode database is and therefore no process is needed or kept resident. > Am I understanding this correctly? "skipping...up to date" Seems familiar, you can also read the source to find other messages you might receive. One of the two packages you want to regular update if you want pull in new "database" updates from Intel. The tools load it once per boot into the cpu where it remains resident till next boot. There's not daemon process after the cpuctl load. The other script stuff is answered in dmesg, syslogd, and rc.conf pages.