[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrUBcDxvtjKC-m97GPwCOHvcoDdGjnMJLukSue8ha55mng@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 11:16:30 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
xen-devel <Xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/msr: Carry on after a non-"safe" MSR access
fails without !panic_on_oops
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 1:46 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> Linus, what's your preference?
>
> So quite frankly, is there any reason we don't just implement
> native_read_msr() as just
>
> unsigned long long native_read_msr(unsigned int msr)
> {
> int err;
> unsigned long long val;
>
> val = native_read_msr_safe(msr, &err);
> WARN_ON_ONCE(err);
> return val;
> }
>
> Note: no inline, no nothing. Just put it in arch/x86/lib/msr.c, and be
> done with it. I don't see the downside.
In the interest of sanity, I want to drop the "native_", too, since
there appear to be few or no good use cases for native_read_msr as
such. I'm tempted to add new functions read_msr and write_msr that
forward to rdmsrl_safe and wrmsrl_safe.
It looks like the msr helpers are every bit as bad as the TSC helpers
used to be :(
--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