[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150313161958.GI31998@pd.tnic>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 17:19:58 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pekka Riikonen <priikone@....fi>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Suresh Siddha <sbsiddha@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
Quentin Casasnovas <quentin.casasnovas@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] x86/fpu: don't abuse drop_init_fpu() in
flush_thread()
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 03:55:42PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> But please look at drop_init_fpu(). If eagerfpu == F it calls drop_fpu() and
> this is what we need. flush_thread() already has the "if (!use_eager_fpu())",
> we can shift drop_fpu() there.
>
> Otherwise, if eagerfpu == T, drop_init_fpu() does restore_init_xstate() and
> this just burns CPU. Until flush_thread user_has_fpu/used_math this state
> restore_init_xstate() is pointless, this state will be lost after preemption.
Yeah, I was wondering why that's there.
One example where drop_init_fpu() seems to make sense is
__kernel_fpu_end(): kernel is done with FPU and current was using the
FPU prior so let's restore it for the eagerfpu case.
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
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