On Fri, Sep 22 2023 at 08:16, Xin3 Li wrote: >> > > +static __always_inline void __wrmsrns(u32 msr, u32 low, u32 high) >> > >> > Shouldn't this be named wrmsrns_safe since it has exception handling, similar >> to >> > the current wrmsrl_safe. >> > >> >> Both safe and unsafe versions have exception handling, while the safe >> version returns an integer to its caller to indicate an exception did >> happen or not. > > I notice there are several call sites using the safe version w/o > checking the return value, should the unsafe version be a better > choice in such cases? Depends. The safe version does not emit a warning on fail. So if the callsite truly does not care about the error it's fine.
