From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
X86 Kernel <x86@kernel.org>,
Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/msr: add on cpu read/modify/write function
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 16:27:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151220152749.GA29805@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1512201421300.28591@nanos>
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 02:28:48PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> So this is a copy of the above !SMP inline. What's wrong with providing:
>
> int rmwmsrl_safe(msr_no, clear_mask, set_mask)
>
> in x86/lib/msr.c and make the !SMP variant of rdmsrl_safe_on_cpu() and that
> variant for the SMP case a simple wrapper around it?
>
> static void remote_rmwmsrl_safe(void *info)
> {
> struct msr_action *ma = info;
>
> return rmwmsrl_safe(ma->msr, ma->clear_mask, ma->set_mask);
> }
>
> No gotos, no pointless code duplication. Just simple.
TBH, I find this new "rmwmsrl" interface (the name is unreadable, btw)
silly:
It provides a plain read-modify-write on a MSR and nothing more but
patch 2 immediately shows that this interface is insufficient for the
other cases, i.e. package_power_limit_irq_save() for example, where you
need to do something more like check bits or error handling.
So there we do smp_call_function_single() with a function which does the
MSR accesses and whatever else is needed.
So why add the former interface in the first place?
Having driver-specific functions do whatever it is required and then
using a single IPI to run them is much cleaner than adding that
unfortunate function which doesn't really suffice.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-20 15:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-11 22:40 [PATCH 0/2] combine remote cpu msr access Jacob Pan
2015-12-11 22:40 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/msr: add on cpu read/modify/write function Jacob Pan
2015-12-20 13:28 ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-12-20 15:27 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2016-01-13 1:14 ` Jacob Pan
2015-12-11 22:40 ` [PATCH 2/2] powercap/rapl: reduce ipi calls Jacob Pan
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=20151220152749.GA29805@pd.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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