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 D123C146588; Fri, 5 Jun 2026 09:54:33 +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=1780653274; cv=none; b=jZTQWj8mqi2OimTM34he3PoeKjGyT2owrupmSWN+Epmjcxyesk209vrCNi0rMkyzGIW7JKDfhFFX1ul5J8zQ3dSFXbyCi08uD/paMnFtwp6GhMnxpEwzbXh4uR6K21M8kxSfgGb9rsW6UPC5WRoOaonT4R9vsI9uuph63sk0f4M= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780653274; c=relaxed/simple; bh=zsemo+nCnANnQh9AzY0tr1G4MASea6c3M4ybmMerCN4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=KNw6hvuxhYwdKXiqs8SEjx1tC2l2jXUoASyF8+dVtQN7nPx8cuXgse7Mxoh6BGha0ORDGcjMk2tKG35z3+PVpVECV7SPxSza/gvoxRKrfpG1SJateZpt1BJPXftherVajI+aYaIOet4QK+sXDOvd+5IeWlkUD87v51UxTJjt/w0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ItxuLAe9; 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="ItxuLAe9" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D7E011F00893; Fri, 5 Jun 2026 09:54:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1780653273; bh=X0dOWmgUD1LSJK6kpD/WOVyas491n6hKvCdEV5X2dmI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=ItxuLAe9m6RzOhTLQPKP2060Vh0bFWjTmFMwCCIp5IZ0P8BcSr4ezt7ZSdyCDhz73 yc7GBg+BC/dnLgLFahp3/mge/TPdaz5YCqTfanzBenGg58GYr1IflgCw8s9LewwecG PKc5QlZNrBIVGypQZA5pVBR5znWhsEfKQ2p3E8FEd6K6k95r+NwWMyfFAmVJ2AR7h9 Y82yYuP9E79tQ7YTMxQmpMBVtXGQMKRzFFxHN1EgK2PBpYeL/KpSA8ZMzL4x17LuWp 4Emwda9sOR39shGb62mCxhRHOOyfbDGvuDaX3lqUi0GeNlh21ay+gXS0WLQdkaarkF mbcpMAvo7LtkA== Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2026 11:54:23 +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-pm@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: * 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? :-) Thanks, Ingo