[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e7ef5294-26da-4a4b-9c6b-f5c0f293a56b@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2025 10:16:47 -0700
From: "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
To: Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
<dave.hansen@...el.com>, <seanjc@...gle.com>, <pbonzini@...hat.com>
CC: <peterz@...radead.org>, <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
<weijiang.yang@...el.com>, <john.allen@....com>, <bp@...en8.de>,
<xin3.li@...el.com>, Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar
<mingo@...hat.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "H. Peter
Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com>, "Mitchell
Levy" <levymitchell0@...il.com>, Stanislav Spassov <stanspas@...zon.de>,
"Eric Biggers" <ebiggers@...gle.com>, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/8] x86/fpu: Drop @perm from guest pseudo FPU
container
On 3/18/2025 8:31 AM, Chao Gao wrote:
>
> -static void fpu_init_guest_permissions(struct fpu_guest *gfpu)
> +static void fpu_lock_guest_permissions(struct fpu_guest *gfpu)
> {
> struct fpu_state_perm *fpuperm;
> u64 perm;
> @@ -218,8 +218,6 @@ static void fpu_init_guest_permissions(struct fpu_guest *gfpu)
> WRITE_ONCE(fpuperm->__state_perm, perm | FPU_GUEST_PERM_LOCKED);
>
> spin_unlock_irq(¤t->sighand->siglock);
> -
> - gfpu->perm = perm & ~FPU_GUEST_PERM_LOCKED;
> }
With the removal, the function no longer requires a struct fpu_guest
argument as it now operates solely on the group leader's FPU state.
Thanks,
Chang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists