[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <78f2021e-339f-9dfb-2aee-51f58ea77ec9@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 10:21:28 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>,
"Yao, Yuan" <yuan.yao@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: Remove dynamic features from xcomp_bv for
init_fpstate
On 10/13/22 09:23, Chang S. Bae wrote:
>
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/xstate.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/xstate.c
> @@ -1127,8 +1127,12 @@ void __copy_xstate_to_uabi_buf(struct membuf to,
> struct fpstate *fpstate,
> * non-compacted format disabled features still occupy state space,
> * but there is no state to copy from in the compacted
> * init_fpstate. The gap tracking will zero these states.
> + *
> + * In the case of guest fpstate, this user_xfeatures does not
> + * dynamically reflect the capacity of the XSAVE buffer but
> + * xfeatures does. So AND them together.
> */
> - mask = fpstate->user_xfeatures;
> + mask = fpstate->user_xfeatures & fpstate->xfeatures;
I'm not sure this is quite right either.
Doesn't kvm expect that all of the ->user_xfeatures will end up being
copied out? We surely can't copy them from 'fpstate' if the feature
isn't there, but we can't skip them entirely, can we?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists