linux-kernel - Re: irq_fpu_usable() is irreliable

lists.openwall.net		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 linux-cve-announce 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]

Message-ID: <20151118065508.GA18849@gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 18 Nov 2015 07:55:08 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc:	tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: irq_fpu_usable() is irreliable

* Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com> wrote:

> [...] Recently I've been tracking down a problem in which irq_fpu_usable() 
> returns false, yet a stack trace shows the first function is the syscall entry 
> point. [...]

Is this 'problem' a performance problem (code not being able to use the FPU 
occasionally and hence sporadically performing poorly), or some sort of actual 
stability/correctness problem?

Also, what CPU does the test system have, Intel or AMD? The FPU behavior can be 
very different in the two cases.

Third, could you post such a problematic stack trace?

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/