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  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:	Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:05:39 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <>
Cc:	Al Viro <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Fenghua Yu <>,
	Suresh Siddha <>,
	Bean Anderson <>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <>, Ingo Molnar <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>,
	"the arch/x86 maintainers" <>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] x86, fpu: don't drop_fpu() in __restore_xstate_sig()
 if use_eager_fpu()

I really dislike this one.

If I read it right, you now do *two* math_state_restore calls for each
FPU signal state restore. That's potentially quite expensive.

Also, you can actually end up with multiple threads pointing to the
same math state in init_task.thread.fpu.state, right? Why is that any
better than just having the save state temporarily contain garbage?

The other patches look sane, this one I really don't like. You may
have good reasons for it, but it's disgusting.


On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Oleg Nesterov <> wrote:
> __restore_xstate_sig() calls math_state_restore() with preemption
> enabled, not good. But this is minor, [...]
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists