On Mar 14, 2016 10:05 AM, "Andy Lutomirski" <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>
> We could probably remove that check and let custom fixups run early.
> I don't see any compelling reason to keep them disabled.  That should
> probably be a separate change, though.

Or we could just use the existing wrmsr_safe() code and not add this new
special code at all.

Look, why are you doing this? We should get rid of the difference between
wrmsr and wrmsr_safe(), not make it bigger.

Just make everything safe. There has never in the history of anything been
an advantage to making things oops and to making things more complicated.

Why is rd/wrmsr() so magically important?

    Linus