From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752232AbbHUQY5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Aug 2015 12:24:57 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:27332 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751650AbbHUQY4 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Aug 2015 12:24:56 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,722,1432623600"; d="scan'208";a="546135254" From: "Chen, Yu C" To: Nigel Cunningham , "rjw@rjwysocki.net" , "pavel@ucw.cz" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "hpa@zytor.com" CC: "Zhang, Rui" , "lenb@kernel.org" , "x86@kernel.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: RE: [PATCH] [v2] x86, suspend: Save/restore extra MSR registers for suspend Thread-Topic: [PATCH] [v2] x86, suspend: Save/restore extra MSR registers for suspend Thread-Index: AQHQ3AePRcV4XrFrwUmfyuJJH4NzU54V3VCAgADDNHA= Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 16:24:44 +0000 Message-ID: <36DF59CE26D8EE47B0655C516E9CE6401CB0067B@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1440158014-29610-1-git-send-email-yu.c.chen@intel.com> <55D71ADD.2000601@nigelcunningham.com.au> In-Reply-To: <55D71ADD.2000601@nigelcunningham.com.au> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Nigel > -----Original Message----- > From: Nigel Cunningham [mailto:nigel@nigelcunningham.com.au] > Sent: Friday, August 21, 2015 8:35 PM > To: Chen, Yu C; rjw@rjwysocki.net; pavel@ucw.cz; tglx@linutronix.de; > mingo@redhat.com; hpa@zytor.com > Cc: Zhang, Rui; lenb@kernel.org; x86@kernel.org; linux-pm@vger.kernel.org; > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v2] x86, suspend: Save/restore extra MSR registers for > suspend > > Hi Chen. > > Is there any issue with saving and restoring MSRs unconditionally? That > would simplify the patch and make things 'just work'. Saving/restoring unconditionally might take BIOS legal action into account, for example, BIOS itself is willing to modify the MSR. And Pavel suggests using quirk to workaround in V1 patch: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/7023891/ So I'm considering a common framework to save/restore these MSRs, because user might need to protect more than one MSR during suspend, so.. I can modify this patch to a simpler version, for example, Introducing two variables in struct saved_context , like MSR_IA32_MISC_ENABLE does. Thanks for your review Best Regards, Yu > > Regards, > > Nigel