linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 03/34] x86/msr: Rename rdpmcl() to rdpmcq()

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6211378e-955b-47f4-8688-ec93728f0087@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 08:06:58 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, "Xin Li (Intel)" <xin@...or.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org,
 virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
 linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
 tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
 dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, acme@...nel.org,
 jgross@...e.com, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com, peterz@...radead.org,
 namhyung@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
 alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org, irogers@...gle.com,
 adrian.hunter@...el.com, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com, wei.liu@...nel.org,
 ajay.kaher@...adcom.com, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
 tony.luck@...el.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, vkuznets@...hat.com,
 luto@...nel.org, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, kys@...rosoft.com,
 haiyangz@...rosoft.com, decui@...rosoft.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 03/34] x86/msr: Rename rdpmcl() to rdpmcq()

On 4/23/25 07:28, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Now that rdpmc() is gone, i.e. rdpmcl/rdpmcq() is the only helper, why not simply
> rename rdpmcl() => rdpmc()?  I see no point in adding a 'q' qualifier; it doesn't
> disambiguate anything and IMO is pure noise.

That makes total sense to me.