[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 19:34:18 +0100
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: riel@...hat.com
Cc: dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, sbsiddha@...il.com,
luto@...capital.net, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
hpa@...or.com, fenghua.yu@...el.com, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] x86,fpu: remove redundant increments of fpu_counter
On 02/02, riel@...hat.com wrote:
>
> From: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
>
> fpu.preload only gets set if new->thread.fpu_counter is already
> larger than 5. Incrementing it further does absolutely nothing.
> Remove those lines.
I _think_ that we increment it further on purpose. Note that fpu_counter
is "char", so it seems that we want no more than 256 automatic preloads.
So I am not sure about this change. At least the changelog doesn't look
right.
Oleg.
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/fpu-internal.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/fpu-internal.h
> @@ -447,7 +447,6 @@ static inline fpu_switch_t switch_fpu_prepare(struct task_struct *old, struct ta
>
> /* Don't change CR0.TS if we just switch! */
> if (fpu.preload) {
> - new->thread.fpu_counter++;
> __thread_set_has_fpu(new);
> prefetch(new->thread.fpu.state);
> } else if (!use_eager_fpu())
> @@ -456,7 +455,6 @@ static inline fpu_switch_t switch_fpu_prepare(struct task_struct *old, struct ta
> old->thread.fpu_counter = 0;
> task_disable_lazy_fpu_restore(old);
> if (fpu.preload) {
> - new->thread.fpu_counter++;
> if (fpu_lazy_restore(new, cpu))
> fpu.preload = 0;
> else
> --
> 1.9.3
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists