From: Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@kernel.org>,
x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [git-pull -tip] x86: Addition of cpufeatures to friendly access miscellaneous MSRs
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 20:47:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090511184727.GF10722@erda.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A086B58.30607@zytor.com>
On 11.05.09 11:15:52, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
>> Jaswinder Singh Rajput (15):
>> x86: Add cpufeature for Processor Name
>> x86: Add cpufeatures for Advanced Power Management
>> x86: Add cpufeature for Microcode update
>> x86: Add cpufeature for Cache MSRs
>> x86: Add cpufeature for Hard and Soft Poweron configuration
>> x86: Add cpufeature for Scaleable bus speed
>> x86: Add cpufeature for Miscellaneous Features
>> x86: Add cpufeature for Platform feature
>> x86: Add cpufeature for Hardware configuration
>> x86: Add cpufeature for System configuration
>> x86: Add cpufeature for System management mode (SMM)
>> x86: Add cpufeature for MM configuration
>> x86: Add cpufeature for Bus configuration
>> x86: Add cpufeature for performance frequency APERF/MPERF
>> x86: Add cpufeature for ancient performance monitoring
>
> Overall, I'm rather confused what the point of this is supposed to be.
> There is value to centralizing CPU knowledge, but some of these flags are
> only used in one place, and as far as I can see in several of your patches
> they aren't used *at all*.
>
> If there is no in-kernel user there is absolutely no point to this.
>From the pull request subject
x86: Addition of cpufeatures to friendly access miscellaneous MSRs
I assume this is mainly done for dumping msrs for debugging
purposes. I don't want to start the discussion again if this really
should be done in kernel space. I would rather parse and decode msr
registers in userspace. MSR tables could be easily implemented there.
Anyway, I think this was already decided. So, maybe for debugging we
should simply read the msrs with rdmsr_safe() and use the exception
handler to check if the msr is implemented. This would avoid most of
the otherwise unused cpufeature flags above.
-Robert
--
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Operating System Research Center
email: robert.richter@amd.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-11 19:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-11 16:14 [git-pull -tip] x86: Addition of cpufeatures to friendly access miscellaneous MSRs Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:29 ` Robert Richter
2009-05-11 16:41 ` [PATCH 1/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for Processor Name Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:43 ` [PATCH 2/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeatures for Advanced Power Management Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:44 ` [PATCH 3/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for Microcode update Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:45 ` [PATCH 4/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for Cache MSRs Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:48 ` [PATCH 5/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for Hard and Soft Poweron configuration Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:49 ` [PATCH 6/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for Scaleable bus speed Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:50 ` [PATCH 7/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for Miscellaneous Features Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:50 ` [PATCH 8/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for Platform feature Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:51 ` [PATCH 9/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for Hardware configuration Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:52 ` [PATCH 10/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for System configuration Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:52 ` [PATCH 11/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for System management mode (SMM) Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:53 ` [PATCH 12/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for MM configuration Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:54 ` [PATCH 13/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for Bus configuration Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:55 ` [PATCH 14/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for performance frequency APERF/MPERF Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 16:55 ` [PATCH 15/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeature for ancient performance monitoring Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 18:13 ` [PATCH 2/15 -tip] x86: Add cpufeatures for Advanced Power Management H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-11 19:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-12 0:31 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-11 18:15 ` [git-pull -tip] x86: Addition of cpufeatures to friendly access miscellaneous MSRs H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-11 18:47 ` Robert Richter [this message]
2009-05-11 19:26 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-12 0:42 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-05-12 0:49 ` H. Peter Anvin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090511184727.GF10722@erda.amd.com \
--to=robert.richter@amd.com \
--cc=hpa@kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jaswinder@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox