[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190115131516.ocyi34ovkgairfiy@linutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 14:15:16 +0100
From: 'Sebastian Andrzej Siewior' <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] x86: load FPU registers on return to userland
On 2019-01-15 12:44:53 [+0000], David Laight wrote:
> Once this is done it might be worth while adding a parameter to
> kernel_fpu_begin() to request the registers only when they don't
> need saving.
> This would benefit code paths where the gains are reasonable but not massive.
So if saving + FPU code is a small win why not do this always?
> The return value from kernel_fpu_begin() ought to indicate which
> registers are available - none, SSE, SSE2, AVX, AVX512 etc.
> So code can use an appropriate implementation.
> (I've not looked to see if this is already the case!)
Either everything is saved or nothing. So if SSE registers are saved
then AVX512 are, too.
I would like to see some benefit of this first before adding/adjusting
the API in a way which makes it possible do something to do wrong. That
said, one thing I would like to do is to get rid of irq_fpu_usable() so
code can use FPU registers and needs not to implement a fallback.
> David
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists