On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 02:12:34PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
Any objection to keeping the MSR name as MSR_IA32_FEATURE_CONTOL? I'd like to have some anchor back to the name used in the SDM.
Any opinions/thoughts on the name of the Kconfig? Currently it's X86_FEATURE_CONTROL_MSR, which gets a bit long with CONFIG_ on the front. I also overlooked that we have MSR_MISC_FEATURE_CONTROL, so having IA32 in the Kconfig would probably be a good idea. X86_IA32 is rather redundant, so maybe IA32_FEAT_CTL or IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL?
Well, what I'd do is since we have MSR_MISC_FEATURE_CONTROL too, I'd call all code and defines pertaining to the 0x3a MSR
<bla>_IA32_FEAT_CTL
I.e.,
CONFIG_IA32_FEAT_CTL, MSR_IA32_FEAT_CTL, ...
and leave a comment over the MSR definition containing the SDM name.
This way, you have a clear distinction between the IA32 and the MISC feature control.
But this is just me and I realize we're pretty much deep inside the bike shed. :)