Re: [RFC PATCH v1 01/15] x86/msr: Replace __wrmsr() with native_wrmsrl()

[Ingo Molnar]

* Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 4/9/25 12:53, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >>> What would folks think about "wrmsr64()"? It's writing a 64-bit 
> >>> value to an MSR and there are a lot of functions in the kernel that 
> >>> are named with the argument width in bits.
> >> Personally, I hate the extra verbosity, mostly visual, since numerals 
> >> are nearly as prominent as capital letters they tend to attract the 
> >> eye. There is a reason why they aren't used this way in assembly 
> >> languages.
> > So what's the consensus here? Both work for me, but I have to pick one. 🙂
> 
> I don't feel strongly about it. You're not going to hurt my feelings if
> you pick the "q" one, so go for "q" unless you have a real preference.

Ok, since hpa seems to hate the wrmsr64()/rdmsr64() names due to the 
numeric verbosity, I'll go with wrmsrq()/rdmsrq().

Thanks,

	Ingo