Re: [RFC PATCH v2 21/34] x86/msr: Utilize the alternatives mechanism to write MSR

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 4/24/25 18:15, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 4/24/25 01:14, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> > > Actually, that is how we get this patch with the existing alternatives
> > > infrastructure.  And we took a step further to also remove the pv_ops
> > > MSR APIs...
> > And this is what I'm questioning. IMHO this approach is adding more
> > code by removing the pv_ops MSR_APIs just because "pv_ops is bad". And
> > I believe most refusal of pv_ops is based on no longer valid reasoning.
> pvops are a headache because it is effectively a secondary alternatives 
> infrastructure that is incompatible with the alternatives one...
> > > It looks to me that you want to add a new facility to the alternatives
> > > infrastructure first?
> > Why would we need a new facility in the alternatives infrastructure?
> I'm not sure what Xin means with "facility", but a key motivation for 
> this is to:
> a. Avoid using the pvops for MSRs when on the only remaining user 
> thereof (Xen) is only using it for a very small subset of MSRs and for 
> the rest it is just overhead, even for Xen;
> b. Being able to do wrmsrns immediate/wrmsrns/wrmsr and rdmsr immediate/ 
> rdmsr alternatives.
> Of these, (b) is by far the biggest motivation. The architectural 
> direction for supervisor states is to avoid ad hoc and XSAVES ISA and 
> instead use MSRs. The immediate forms are expected to be significantly 
> faster, because they make the MSR index available at the very beginning 
> of the pipeline instead of at a relatively late stage.
Note that to support the immediate forms, we *must* do these inline, or 
the const-ness of the MSR index -- which applies to by far the vast 
majority of MSR references -- gets lost. pvops does exactly that.
Furthermore, the MSR immediate instructions take a 64-bit number in a 
single register; as these instructions are by necessity relatively long, 
it makes sense for the alternative sequence to accept a 64-bit input 
register and do the %eax/%edx shuffle in the legacy fallback code... we 
did a bunch of experiments to see what made most sense.
        -hpa