From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Lutomirski Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/msr: Carry on after a non-"safe" MSR access fails without !panic_on_oops Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 11:16:30 -0700 Message-ID: References: <130a3b7ef4788baae3a6fe71293ab17442bc9a0a.1442793572.git.luto@kernel.org> <20150921084642.GA30984@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andrew Morton , KVM list , Peter Zijlstra , the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux Kernel Mailing List , xen-devel , Borislav Petkov , Paolo Bonzini , Thomas Gleixner , Arjan van de Ven , Ingo Molnar List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 1:46 AM, Ingo Molnar 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