Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 21 Sep 2015 10:27:49 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/msr: Carry on after a non-"safe" MSR access fails without !panic_on_oops | From | Linus Torvalds <> |
| |
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> wrote: >> >> How many msr reads are <i>so</i> critical that the function call >> overhead would matter? > > if anything qualifies it'd be switch_to() and friends.
Is there anything else than the FS/GS_BASE thing (possibly hidden behind inlines etc that I didn't get from a quick grep)? And why is that sometimes using the "safe" version (in do_arch_prctl()), and sometimes not (switch_to())?
I'm not convinced that mess is a good argument for the status quo ;)
> note that I'm not entirely happy about the notion of "safe" MSRs. > They're safe as in "won't fault".
I wouldn't object to renaming them.
Linus
| |