Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 3 Aug 2018 16:48:26 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
        fenghua.yu@intel.com, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com, gavin.hindman@intel.com,
        jithu.joseph@intel.com, mingo@redhat.com,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] x86/intel_rdt: Restoration of Cache
 Pseudo-Locked regions
Message-ID: <20180803144826.GL2458@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <cover.1532463771.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1808031343020.1745@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <3a33c9e9-4432-dbef-c3b7-a4da1740b0f7@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3a33c9e9-4432-dbef-c3b7-a4da1740b0f7@intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.0 (2018-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 07:23:27AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 08/03/2018 04:45 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> Within the kernel two locations with direct invocations of the WBINVD
> >> instruction are coverted to native_wbinvd() and compile tested. Neither
> >> location is likely to be used on the platforms supporting Cache Pseudo-Locking.
> > Can we just get rid of WBINVD?
> 
> In general, or just this specific case?

In general I think. There aren't that many users IIRC.