From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
CC: "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "acme@kernel.org" <acme@kernel.org>,
        "eranian@google.com" <eranian@google.com>,
        "jolsa@kernel.org" <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        "ak@linux.intel.com" <ak@linux.intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V2 1/2] x86/msr: add msr_set/clear_bit_on_cpu/cpus
 access functions
Thread-Topic: [PATCH V2 1/2] x86/msr: add msr_set/clear_bit_on_cpu/cpus
 access functions
Thread-Index: AQHSpxOXdf0RmTi9aEmLRJpirD7KsqGoYhUAgACHrvA=
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 17:12:48 +0000
Message-ID: <37D7C6CF3E00A74B8858931C1DB2F077536C5BFE@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
References: <1490629658-4308-1-git-send-email-kan.liang@intel.com>
 <1490629658-4308-2-git-send-email-kan.liang@intel.com>
 <20170327165710.zvqa7y7e6adby5bc@pd.tnic>
In-Reply-To: <20170327165710.zvqa7y7e6adby5bc@pd.tnic>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Length: 1805
Lines: 64


> 
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 08:47:37AM -0700, kan.liang@intel.com wrote:
> > From: Kan Liang <Kan.liang@intel.com>
> >
> > Having msr_set/clear_bit on many cpus or given CPU can avoid extra
> > unnecessory IPIs
> 
> How does that happen?
>

My previous patch did a read-modify-write operation. Compared with the
single operation set/clear, it will has extra IPIs.
Sorry for the confusing wording.
I will change the description. 

> You have smp_call_function_many() sending IPIs to each CPU in the mask.
> Doesn't look like avoiding anything to me.
> 
> Now if you want to have interfaces set/clear_bit_on_cpu(s), that's a
> different story.
> 
> And those actually double the amount of IPIs the moment you do a read-
> modify-write operation on the MSR, i.e., you want to read *and* write
> afterwards.
> 
> If you only want to do a single operation - set or clear - like you're doing in
> your other patch, then I guess that's fine as it wraps the
> smp_call_function* boilerplate code.
> 
> > and simplify MSR content manipulation, when it only needs to flip a
> > bit.
> > There is already msr_set/clear_bit, but missing the _on_cpu and
> > _on_cpus version.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <Kan.liang@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h | 29 ++++++++++++++++++
> >  arch/x86/lib/msr-smp.c     | 76
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 105 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h
> > index 898dba2..9bc999b 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h
> > @@ -20,6 +20,11 @@ struct msr {
> >  	};
> >  };
> >
> > +struct msr_bit_info {
> > +	u32 msr_no;
> > +	u8 bit;
> > +};
> 
> No, not *another* struct msr*info. Please reuse msr_info.
> 

OK.

Thanks,
Kan