From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chao Peng Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 08/10] x86: add CMT related MSRs in allowed list Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 18:27:17 +0800 Message-ID: <20141002102717.GB12435@pengc-linux> References: <1412074152-2955-1-git-send-email-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com> <1412074152-2955-9-git-send-email-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com> <542ACBAB020000780003B181@mail.emea.novell.com> <20141001105924.GC7360@pengc-linux> <542BFED9020000780003B832@mail.emea.novell.com> Reply-To: Chao Peng Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <542BFED9020000780003B832@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: keir@xen.org, Ian.Campbell@citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com, George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 12:17:13PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 01.10.14 at 12:59, wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 02:26:35PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >>> On 30.09.14 at 12:49, wrote: > >> > --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/msr-index.h > >> > +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/msr-index.h > >> > @@ -324,6 +324,8 @@ > >> > #define MSR_IA32_ENERGY_PERF_BIAS 0x000001b0 > >> > > >> > /* Platform Shared Resource MSRs */ > >> > +#define MSR_IA32_QOSEVTSEL 0x00000c8d > >> > >> Is this still an appropriate name with then name change "QOS" -> "CMT"? > >> > >> > +#define MSR_IA32_QMC 0x00000c8e > >> > >> The Q here may similarly be questionable now. > >> > >> > #define MSR_IA32_PQR_ASSOC 0x00000c8f > >> > >> And maybe even the one here? > >> > >> > > > > As the SDM still use the old names, I left these names unchanged so that > > no surprise for someone don't know the history to look into the spec. > > > > So it's more like a spec issue. > > > > On the other hand, I also feel the code here looks ugly. So maybe we can > > still change them to 'correct' ones? > > If you can first internally agree on stable names going forward? Yes, I'm pushing for this. Chao