[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18482.37548.885708.24670@harpo.it.uu.se>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 10:58:20 +0200
From: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>
To: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
Cc: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>, mingo@...e.hu, hpa@...or.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, andi@...stfloor.org, roland@...hat.com,
drepper@...hat.com, Hongjiu.lu@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk, dan@...ian.org, asit.k.mallick@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] x86: xsave/xrstor support, ucontext_t extensions
Suresh Siddha writes:
> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 04:52:01PM +0200, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> > > But we can
> > >use some what similar magic, if the fxsave/fxrstor give away
> > >some of the fields at the end of fxsave image (today it is reserved
> > >and ignored during fxsave/fxrstor) for software use.
> > >We can then use these fields at the end of fpstate, to indicate the presence of
> > >xstate. But this requires some architecture changes like giving
> > >away this space for SW use. We can take this to architects and
> > >see what they think.
> >
> > If the HW doesn't store anything valuable there, we could store
> > SW flags/cookies there on signal delivery, and clear them before
> > fxrstor (unless the HW is known to ignore those fields).
> > But it depends on how forgiving the HW is.
>
> Ok. CPU folks are planning to make some of the bytes at the end of fxsave
> image, SW usable.
Nice.
> We can use some of these fields, to represent the extended state
> presence with a cookie, save area size, mask of the state
> stored. If needed, we can include the start address of the fpstate pointer
> (also as part of the cookie), so that we can detect the situation,
> where apps are just memcopying sizeof(struct _fpstate) from the fpstate
> pointer (but not aware of the extended state).
I use a similar technique to detect user-space mangling
of ucontexts on Solaris.
> we don't need any ucontext_t extensions any more and just
> use the fpstate pointer to indicate the extended state aswell, right?
Yes, the old magic distinguishes x87-only from x87+fxsr, the new magic
distinguishes fxsr from xsave.
> In addition, we need to make sure that for 32bit non-rt sigframes, we
> don't modify the extramask[] offset.
Thanks,
/Mikael
--
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