[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/msr: Carry on after a non-"safe" MSR access fails without !panic_on_oops
- To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 09:36:15 -0700
- Cc: KVM list <kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 16:36:38 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 1:46 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> 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.
How many msr reads are <i>so</i> critical that the function call
overhead would matter? Get rid of the inline version of the _safe()
thing too, and put that thing there too.
Linus
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
