[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191129210551.GC12055@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2019 23:06:12 +0200
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
x86@...nel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Tony W Wang-oc <TonyWWang-oc@...oxin.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/19] x86/msr-index: Clean up bit defines for
IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL MSR
On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 02:14:08PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 11:46:14AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 07:12:22PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > As pointed out by Boris, the defines for bits in IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL
> > > are quite a mouthful, especially the VMX bits which must differentiate
> > > between enabling VMX inside and outside SMX (TXT) operation. Rename the
> > > bit defines to abbreviate FEATURE_CONTROL as FEAT_CTL so that they're a
> > > little friendlier on the eyes. Keep the full name for the MSR itself to
> > > help even the most obtuse reader decipher the abbreviation, and to match
> > > the name used by the Intel SDM.
> >
> > If you anyway shorten the prefix, why not then go directly to FT_CTL?
> > It is as obvious as FEAT_CTL is. Given the exhausting long variable
> > names like FEAT_CTL_VMX_ENABLED_OUTSIDE_SMX this would be worth of
> > considering.
>
> If we're going to rename the function and file, I think we should stick
> with the slightly longer FEAT_CTL. FT_CTL for the bits is ok since there
> is more context to work with, but init_ft_ctl_msr() looks weird to me.
OK.
/Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists