[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120509203047.GA334@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 22:30:47 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...e.hu,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, suresh@...stanetworks.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86, xsave: remove thread_has_fpu() bug check in
__sanitize_i387_state()
Hi Suresh,
I can't really comment this series, my understanding of this code
is too limited.
But could you explain this patch? I am just curious.
On 05/08, Suresh Siddha wrote:
>
> BUG_ON() in __sanitize_i387_state() is checking that the fpu state
> is not live any more. But for preempt kernels, task can be scheduled
> out and in at any place and the preload_fpu logic during context switch
> can make the fpu registers live again.
And? Do you see any particular scenario when this BUG_ON() is wrong?
Afaics, __sanitize_i387_state() should not be called if the task can
be scheduled in with ->fpu_counter != 0.
> Similarly during core dump, thread dumping the core can schedule out
> and in for page-allocations etc in non-preempt case.
Again, can't understand. The core-dumping thread does init_fpu()
before it calls sanitize_i387_state().
Oleg.
--
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