[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090610111352.GA4482@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 13:13:52 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: "Michael S. Zick" <lkml@...ethan.org>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...nel.org>,
Harald Welte <HaraldWelte@...tech.com>,
Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] X86: cpu_debug support for VIA / Centaur CPU's
* Michael S. Zick <lkml@...ethan.org> wrote:
> On Wed June 10 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > >
> > > > MSRs should really be enumerated along CPU features. They will be
> > > > accessed if a CPU offers that CPU feature.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Nice in theory, but so many MSRs have to be enumerated with obscure test
> > > combinations, that it really isn't practical in the general case. That
> > > is why we have the safe MSR variants.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, the safe read should never fault - there should be all
> > > > zeroes or an error return.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Error return, MSRs #GP if not present. All zero means a present
> > > MSR (which is zero.)
> >
> > yes, of course - i meant the /debug/x86/cpu/* behavior: it should
> > either result zeroes, or should return -EINVAL. (probably the
> > latter)
> >
>
> Return zeroes - same as hardware case for bits which can't be set.
> Returning -EINVAL might match a specific bit pattern caller is
> looking for.
these files are accessed via read(). The -EINVAL is the syscall
return value. The value (if any) goes into the buffer that is being
read into. So there's no way to 'match a specific bit pattern' -
it's two separate spaces.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists