Re: [-mm patch] {rd,wr}msr_on_cpu SMP=n optimization

[Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 01:21:45AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
 > On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 07:14:34PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
 > > On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 01:07:13AM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
 > >...
 > >  > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
 > >  >  void rdmsr_on_cpu(unsigned int cpu, u32 msr_no, u32 *l, u32 *h);
 > >  >  void wrmsr_on_cpu(unsigned int cpu, u32 msr_no, u32 l, u32 h);
 > >  > +#else  /*  CONFIG_SMP  */
 > >  > +static inline void rdmsr_on_cpu(unsigned int cpu, u32 msr_no, u32 *l, u32 *h)
 > >  > +{
 > >  > +	rdmsr(msr_no, *l, *h);
 > >  > +}
 > >  > +static inline void wrmsr_on_cpu(unsigned int cpu, u32 msr_no, u32 l, u32 h)
 > >  > +{
 > >  > +	wrmsr(msr_no, l, h);
 > >  > +}
 > >  > +#endif  /*  CONFIG_SMP  */
 > > 
 > > BUG_ON(cpu!=smp_processor_id()) maybe?
 > 
 > This is the CONFIG_SMP=n case.

Yes. If someone is asking for the MSR on a specific CPU in UP mode,
it's a bug.

		Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/