[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/AMD: support further feature masking MSRs
On 07/04/14 12:53, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 07.04.14 at 12:23, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 07/04/14 10:43, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> /* AMD processors prior to family 10h required a 32-bit password */ >>> if (c->x86 >= 0x10) { >>> wrmsr(MSR_K8_FEATURE_MASK, feat_edx, feat_ecx); >>> wrmsr(MSR_K8_EXT_FEATURE_MASK, extfeat_edx, extfeat_ecx); >>> + if (!skip_l7s0_eax_ebx) >>> + wrmsr(MSR_AMD_L7S0_FEATURE_MASK, l7s0_ebx, l7s0_eax); >>> + if (!skip_thermal_ecx) { >>> + rdmsr(MSR_AMD_THRM_FEATURE_MASK, eax, edx); >>> + wrmsr(MSR_AMD_THRM_FEATURE_MASK, thermal_ecx, edx); >>> + } >>> } else { >>> wrmsr_amd(MSR_K8_FEATURE_MASK, feat_edx, feat_ecx); >>> wrmsr_amd(MSR_K8_EXT_FEATURE_MASK, extfeat_edx, extfeat_ecx); >> While editing this, can we remove this crazy split between wrmsr and >> wrmsr_amd ? It is safe to use wrmsr_amd in all cases where wrmsr is needed. > I'm against this - the way it is now makes it very explicit where the > extra input is required. > > Jan > It bloats the function, which would be less bad if it were an __init function. A comment can perfectly easily say /* Password required for fam 10h and older */ ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |