[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cc6fdd45-a5b7-74f0-8cee-44520e7387db@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 13:43:17 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
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 05/22] x86/fpu: Remove fpu->initialized usage in
copy_fpstate_to_sigframe()
On 1/18/19 1:37 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2019-01-18 13:17:28 [-0800], Dave Hansen wrote:
>> On 1/18/19 1:14 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>>> The kernel saves task's FPU registers on user's signal stack before
>>> entering the signal handler. Can we avoid that and have in-kernel memory
>>> for that? Does someone rely on the FPU registers from the task in the
>>> signal handler?
>>
>> This is part of our ABI for *sure*.
>
> I missed that part. I will try to look it up and look see if says
> something about optional part.
> But ABI means we must keep doing it even if there are no users?
I'd bet a large sum of money there are users.
Google for 'uc_mcontext fpregs'.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists