From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3C4E3E317F; Fri, 5 Jun 2026 09:56:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780653398; cv=none; b=NdUweVl3oIbJ1TIYzibydTx+Wkc0mONJLWmUauLq0oRE9Q3Rui+LXNWtVZARdVk7aex0zPbuIwhaF7tHpuose2D/XPRnjJLnRJFGye3tSAIPz14OOCOtx/MkGtygxWh9HoTnSvPO7DJxPdbsJdWeATu19IXKPUU10dWuKxh+P+s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780653398; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8H9wKx8dX+figccFR5stRhiGN7VkGAlYossHDGGegbE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=EBdfuXgUB0gzTqrliT6gls2up2xX1mj0xNEkNL8Umy5KPJRR0zds2+edL0Kf9AhIDEYRQsYOInMYzSEYuxmtwRfjw+FZT1twRLnUr7CFi2dYPOrYD6fkCVcmhY3fGeTlJcCW25sKuOVEItgz7MmO5q4BL1G1HM5PX+zJa0qNt6k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=fWTWaD5U; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="fWTWaD5U" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 56E531F00893; Fri, 5 Jun 2026 09:56:26 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1780653394; bh=rBm+sJBFfKQ0leM+vzL2fC/5FBNBaXDvMZmqXAxdLgA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=fWTWaD5UKYA8ZBiMMzBnwQnsCEEbZRqWjY8KkeV8T55z4oMapSdIGT8x55ANdZcfO yeaSGfCP1KVRCkHKOKBUiVJu7aE+EeLsz01uJAN+AT9mPY4F9XbZ4yq6NB36FtzwF3 SH72fK3lkOYuBLTY24KZNPoiXxB1IV3k+HrEsmsLJ+FUmWWrJ2MIIcerWYLEnKS0N4 7rPn14xyfZII3BBI9MjSfPQV5BVauGP1ySggA48HhQ8zAVNPB32a31GlwNg6eWPkvI 5KnwoaCdBy1gDKoOD//KuccY8zHarlc7miybJmBPZXeQMm7vGKP3BqD3UULw/HPP2F d4oLewzRl1yuA== Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2026 11:56:24 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=FCrgen_Gro=DF?= Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , "H. Peter Anvin" , Tony Luck , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Guenter Roeck , Daniel Lezcano , Zhang Rui , Lukasz Luba , Peter Zijlstra , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Namhyung Kim , Mark Rutland , Alexander Shishkin , Jiri Olsa , Ian Rogers , Adrian Hunter , James Clark , Huang Rui , Mario Limonciello , Perry Yuan , K Prateek Nayak , Srinivas Pandruvada , Len Brown , Hans de Goede , Ilpo =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=E4rvinen?= Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] x86/msr: Drop 32-bit variants of *_on_cpu() MSR functions Message-ID: References: <20260605070826.2995913-1-jgross@suse.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: * Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Jürgen Groß wrote: > > > > Well, we had a similar discussion back when we standardized on > > > rdmsrq() and wrmsrq(), and we use them as our primary 64-bit > > > MSR handling APIs. Why have a different pattern in any of the > > > derived APIs? It should really use the same conceptual namespace, > > > not some confusing mixture of two naming schemes. > > > > In the long run I'd like to do the same conversion for the rdmsr*() and > > wrmsr*() interfaces, too (so only offering and using the 64-bit variants). > > Why? We had this discussion for the original MSR API namespace > cleanup a year ago, and decided to standardize on the rdmsrq()/wrmsrq() > namespace: > > c435e608cf59 x86/msr: Rename 'rdmsrl()' to 'rdmsrq()' > 78255eb23973 x86/msr: Rename 'wrmsrl()' to 'wrmsrq()' > 6fe22abacd40 x86/msr: Rename 'rdmsrl_safe()' to 'rdmsrq_safe()' > 6fa17efe4544 x86/msr: Rename 'wrmsrl_safe()' to 'wrmsrq_safe()' > 5e404cb7ac4c x86/msr: Rename 'rdmsrl_safe_on_cpu()' to 'rdmsrq_safe_on_cpu()' > 27a23a544a55 x86/msr: Rename 'wrmsrl_safe_on_cpu()' to 'wrmsrq_safe_on_cpu()' > d7484babd2c4 x86/msr: Rename 'rdmsrl_on_cpu()' to 'rdmsrq_on_cpu()' > c895ecdab2e4 x86/msr: Rename 'wrmsrl_on_cpu()' to 'wrmsrq_on_cpu()' > ebe29309c4d2 x86/msr: Rename 'mce_rdmsrl()' to 'mce_rdmsrq()' > 8e44e83f57c3 x86/msr: Rename 'mce_wrmsrl()' to 'mce_wrmsrq()' > e2b8af0c6939 x86/msr: Rename 'rdmsrl_amd_safe()' to 'rdmsrq_amd_safe()' > 604d15d15ebd x86/msr: Rename 'wrmsrl_amd_safe()' to 'wrmsrq_amd_safe()' > 7cbc2ba7c107 x86/msr: Rename 'native_wrmsrl()' to 'native_wrmsrq()' > eef476f15c83 x86/msr: Rename 'wrmsrl_cstar()' to 'wrmsrq_cstar()' > > There's several good reasons to use the 'q' suffix in the API names, > why relitigate this? :-) And just to be clear: I have no objections whatsoever to phasing out all the old 32-bit APIs, like your series does. Thanks, Ingo