Gentoo already has it, however the latest ebuild is still masked, so one would need to put "sys-kernel/linux-firmware ~amd64" inside a file in /etc/portage/package.accept_keywords, or better yet, always run the git version, using * instead of ~amd64.
Apart from that, it's necessary to "sudo emaint sync -A && sudo emerge -av sys-kernel/linux-firmware", while checking that the correct files are included in the savedconfig file if using it. After that, rebuild the kernel or the initramfs and reboot.
I'm not sure five year olds know what microcode is. I'm 35, been in tech nearly 20 years and don't recall having heard that specific term before today.
The whole "explain like I'm 5" thing is ridiculous. A huge percentage of topics simply cannot be broken down to an average 5 year old in a way that makes the conversation worth having at all. The 5 year old has no context about why in recent years there has been a huge push towards running your own code on other people's computers using various isolation techniques, or why people are trying to exploit that. The 5 year old has no context for what the exploits actually are, or how to mitigate them. Even if you break all of those things down into 5 year old bitesized chunks, you end up with boring word soup completely disconnected from the meaningful parts of the conversation.
Really what ELI5 is, is a technique to allow the asker to not have to look anything up. From the parent comment, you can look up "patch", "AMD", "microcode"; or you can demand "ELI5!" and have someone else type up long, careful definitions that don't reference context or words that a 5 year old doesn't know.
Regarding what microcode is, here is a good explanation of the differences between microcode and firmware:
I agree that many topics are hard to explain to a five year old, but ELI5 can be very helpful in forcing people to simplify their writing. Many people explain things in an unnecessarily complex way, and ELI5 at least makes them think about the target audience.
A modern generalist CPU is made of many smaller, simpler, specialized CPUs : there's a whole orchestra inside.
Amongst those smaller CPUs, there's a master : it'll see to decoding of instruction, sending jobs to the various CPU units, and fetching the results of said jobs. That master is running a program, executing ... microcode ! And of course, if there is a program, there are bugs. CPUs have bugs since CPUs were invented.
Microcode itself was present in early CPUs, (say, the Z80), but hardcoded. Nowadays, microcode can be uploaded to a CPU to fix bugs.
A Grandchild's Guide to Using Grandpa's Computer a.k.a. "If Dr. Zeuss were a Technical Writer" was written in 1994 and mentions microcode.
Microcode updates are always discussed when talking about microarchitectural security vulnerabilities (and other scary CPU errata like https://lkml.org/lkml/2023/3/8/976).
Microcode is always mentioned when discussing CPU design evolution.
It's funny that it's "always" mentioned, yet it's not familiar to me. Also curious the Wikipedia article for CPU design doesn't mention it, since it's "always" referenced.
Just because something is familiar to you, or even large swaths of a given population, doesn't mean everyone should be expected to know it.
I love learning new things. I love discovering topics I know nothing about, and I love picking the brains of those passionate about them. But the condescension from a certain type of tech nerd sucks all the fun out of learning. I've certainly been guilty of this in the past.
> It's funny that it's "always" mentioned, yet it's not familiar to me. Also curious the Wikipedia article for CPU design doesn't mention it, since it's "always" referenced.
you're not going to convince others that microcode is some kind of foreign concept to CPUs just because you yourself were unfamiliar.
Yes, it can be a downer to discover that you're more naive in a subject than you had previously thought you were more familiar.
>Also curious the Wikipedia article for CPU design doesn't mention it, since it's "always" referenced.
microcode is something that is implemented by CPUs that are too big and expensive to replace -- it's not something that is fundamental to processor designs. It's something we now live with to prevent things like the 'pentium bug' from costing Intel many-many dollars after a consumer-products forced recall/replacement.
At this point in history I think that if someone wants to consider themselves to be well-versed or knowledgeable about consumer CPUs then learning about microcode is a hard requirement. It's a false metaphor now to consider a CPU to be an unchanging entity, and that's important to at least be aware of -- it's literally one of the only ways that t
When did I say it's a foreign concept? I said it's not common knowledge for five year olds, and in reply, someone stated it's "always" mentioned. I was simply demonstrating that it's not "always" mentioned.
> At this point in history I think that if someone wants to consider themselves to be well-versed or knowledgeable about consumer CPUs then learning about microcode is a hard requirement.
This statement strikes me as hyperbolic. A CPU/hardware engineer, or even security-conscious software engineer, sure. But I can't understand why there is a reason for a consumer to care.
