From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org,
tip-bot for Andy Lutomirski <tipbot@zytor.com>,
peterz@infradead.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
luto@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/asm/msr: Make wrmsrl_safe() a function
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 12:04:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150605100442.GA8995@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A63099EB-1B4E-45D8-B1FA-00923D701A49@zytor.com>
* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> Shouldn't we make it a proper function sine there is going to have to be a
> function call involved anyway?
Yeah, so what I think should be done instead is to flip around the API:
make wrmsrl_safe() the primary API and derive wrmsr_safe() from that,
because it's the saner API and because we have 3 times more wrmsrl_safe()
users right now!
And I'd make _that_ mapping inline, which would catch crap like:
./arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h: return wrmsr_safe(msr, (u32)val, (u32)(val >> 32));
./arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c: wrmsr_safe(msr, (u32)pfn, (u32)(pfn >> 32));
and would turn it back into wrmsrl_safe(pfn)/etc. seemlessly.
In addition to that we might even phase out the high/low API altogether, as code
like this:
!wrmsr_safe(MSR_EFER,
header->pmode_efer_low,
header->pmode_efer_high))
should probably use a single u64.
But crappy paravirt indirections get in the way of an easy, trivial restructuring,
as usual...
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-05 10:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-05 8:42 [tip:x86/asm] x86/asm/msr: Make wrmsrl_safe() a function tip-bot for Andy Lutomirski
2015-06-05 8:57 ` H. Peter Anvin
2015-06-05 10:04 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2015-06-05 11:11 ` Borislav Petkov
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=20150605100442.GA8995@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tipbot@zytor.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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