[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrWQUEKKvVcHV+KtuBD=MadaRbvqJGoRipFWmKLCS3T08A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 13:25:04 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Sai Praneeth Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@...el.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/10] x86/xsaves: Fix XSAVES known issues
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 01:03:43PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> That's not feasible. Think of dynamic libraries or just-in-time
>> compilers. What instruction set does /usr/bin/java use, for instance? :)
>
> The java argument is true. In that case or when the bitmask is missing, we can allocate for all supported features.
>
I actually want to see us moving in the direction of unconditionally
allocating everything on process startup. If we can stop using CR0.TS
entirely, I think everything will be better.
--Andy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists