From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org  Mon Nov 23 04:53:33 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@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: <CAD2Ti2-0jKLn9RXR5hc5FgZac_CbMnFMHf_XK2vc9f_nuZM=NQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <564F3FBF.8050603@gmail.com>
From: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 23:52:53 -0500
Message-ID: <CAD2Ti29=wph99huR1HYihJAELsgHT8hDiny0XiEMCEH+wDU6Uw@mail.gmail.com>
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-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 04:53:33 -0000

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Will Senn <will.senn@gmail.com> 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.