linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] i387: support lazy restore of FPU state

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 20 Feb 2012 18:10:29 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com>,
	Jongman Heo <jongman.heo@...sung.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] i387: support lazy restore of FPU state

On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com> wrote:
>
> I haven't tried really figuring this out yet, but building the Fedora kernel
> on x86_64 with your latest tree results in:
>
> ERROR: "fpu_owner_task" [lib/raid6/raid6_pq.ko] undefined!

Ugh. My dislike of modules on my machines strikes again, and
apparently nobody else tested the patches I sent out.

The attached trivial patch fixes it, I bet.

Although I do wonder if we should just make kernel_fpu_begin() be a
real function instead of inlining it. I'm not sure it makes sense to
inline that thing, and it might be better to export that one instead.
Comments?

                     Linus

View attachment "patch.diff" of type "text/x-patch" (548 bytes)