From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: RE: [PATCH] Allow dom0 to write MSR IA32_ENERGY_PERF_BIAS Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2011 09:03:41 +0000 Message-ID: <4D2441FD020000780002A68E@vpn.id2.novell.com> References: <4D24371B020000780002A62B@vpn.id2.novell.com> <4D243A6A020000780002A658@vpn.id2.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Gang Wei , Keir Fraser Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >>> On 05.01.11 at 09:55, "Wei, Gang" wrote: > Jan Beulich wrote on 2011-01-05: >>>>> On 05.01.11 at 09:22, Keir Fraser wrote: >>> On 05/01/2011 08:17, "Jan Beulich" wrote: >>>=20 >>>>>>> On 05.01.11 at 09:13, Keir Fraser = wrote: >>>>> On 05/01/2011 07:59, "Jan Beulich" wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> Why would you allow this only if Dom0 has its vcpus pinned? >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> It is meaningless if dom0 can't control all pcpus exactly. Only >>>>>>> in case of dom0 vcpus pinned, it makes sense. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Disagree. The user mode tool could set its own affinity (virtual >>>>>> and >>>>>> physical) and then issue the MSR write. Please don't enforce >>>>>> restrictions where not really needed (I actually suppose that the >>>>>> restriction should be removed for MSR_IA32_THERM_CONTROL too). >=20 > Ok, I accept such kind of usages. So how about simply check in my patch = and=20 > do remove these restrictions in your following patches? Yes, that's what we all seem to agree to now (and I just sent out that other patch). Jan