[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <68dba45c-a677-4f6d-b7ec-e896aef3d27b@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 10:54:31 -0700
From: Xin Li <xin@...or.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, bp@...en8.de,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
peterz@...radead.org, jgross@...e.com, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com,
rafael@...nel.org, lenb@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] x86/msr: Convert a native_wrmsr() use to
native_wrmsrq()
On 5/15/2025 8:27 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Xin Li (Intel) <xin@...or.com> wrote:
>
>> Convert a native_wrmsr() use to native_wrmsrq() to zap meaningless type
>> conversions when a u64 MSR value is splitted into two u32.
>>
>
> BTW., at this point we should probably just replace
> sev_es_wr_ghcb_msr() calls with direct calls to:
>
> native_wrmsrq(MSR_AMD64_SEV_ES_GHCB, ...);
>
> as sev_es_wr_ghcb_msr() is now basically an open-coded native_wrmsrq().
>
I thought about it, however it looks to me that current code prefers not
to spread MSR_AMD64_SEV_ES_GHCB in 17 callsites. And anyway it's a
__always_inline function.
But as you have asked, I will make the change unless someone objects.
Thanks!
Xin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists