* Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > and to point out that the 'invalidate' part of the WBNOINVD name is
> > a misnomer, as it doesn't invalidate anything, it only writes back
> > dirty cachelines.
>
> I wouldn't call it a misnomer, the NO part makes it semantically
> accurate.
If only 'NO' in
On Sat, May 17, 2025, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Sean Christopherson wrote:
>
> > From: Kevin Loughlin
> >
> > In line with WBINVD usage, add WBONINVD helper functions. Fall back to
> > WBINVD (via alternative()) if WBNOINVD isn't supported, as WBINVD provides
> > a superset of functionality, j
* Sean Christopherson wrote:
> From: Kevin Loughlin
>
> In line with WBINVD usage, add WBONINVD helper functions. Fall back to
> WBINVD (via alternative()) if WBNOINVD isn't supported, as WBINVD provides
> a superset of functionality, just more slowly.
>
> Note, alternative() ensures compat
From: Kevin Loughlin
In line with WBINVD usage, add WBONINVD helper functions. Fall back to
WBINVD (via alternative()) if WBNOINVD isn't supported, as WBINVD provides
a superset of functionality, just more slowly.
Note, alternative() ensures compatibility with early boot code as needed.
Signed
