[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrX-VMDNJJzoiEO3KqpA+B7+tbz=Lh07gvSX3yWvqGSvyg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 09:02:13 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] x86/entry/32: Clean up enable_sep_cpu to prepare for
64-bit merge
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jul 2015 08:31:39 -0700
> Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
>
>> Switch from wrmsr to wrmsrl_safe to prepare to merge the 32-bit and
>> 64-bit code, and use __KERNEL_CS explicitly to initialize
>> MSR_IA32_SYSENTER_CS. While we're at it, tweak the whitespace a
>> bit.
>
> Saying "prepare to merge the 32-bit and 64-bit" isn't that informative
> to why this patch is needed. Can you please describe in the change log
> what can fault with the wrmsr call, when we do the merge?
Oh...
Nothing can fault in the wrmsr as far as I know, but maybe there's a
CPU out there that advertises SEP but doesn't have the MSRs.
Ingo, Thomas, want a v2 that explains that the wrmsr_safe is there for
consistency but that I don't know why 32bit does it? Another option
would be to remove the _safe from the 32-bit version.
--Andy
--
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