On 24.04.25 10:06, Xin Li wrote:
On 4/23/2025 9:05 AM, Jürgen Groß wrote:It's not a major change, but when it is patched to use the immediate form MSR write instruction, it's straightforwardly streamlined.It should be rather easy to switch the current wrmsr/rdmsr paravirt patching locations to use the rdmsr/wrmsr instructions instead of doing a call to native_*msr(). The case of the new immediate form could be handled the same way.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 And I believe most refusal of pv_ops is based on no longer valid reasoning.
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? Juergen
OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
