[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250516231858.27899-1-ebiggers@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 16:18:55 -0700
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: x86@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ayush Jain <Ayush.Jain3@....com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 0/3] x86: Don't support kernel-mode FPU with hardirqs disabled
This series returns to my earlier suggestion to make x86 not support
kernel-mode FPU when hardirqs are disabled, aligning it with arm64
(https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250220051325.340691-2-ebiggers@kernel.org).
To make this possible despite the use of the kernel-mode FPU functions
by __save_processor_state() (which I mentioned at
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250228035924.GC5588@sol.localdomain), I've
changed __save_processor_state() to use a new function instead of
(mis)using the kernel-mode FPU functions.
This slightly reduces the overhead of kernel-mode FPU (since the result
is fewer checks), and it fixes the issue reported at
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250516112217.GBaCcf6Yoc6LkIIryP@fat_crate.local/
where irq_fpu_usable() incorrectly returned false during CPU
initialization, causing a crash in the SHA-256 library code.
Eric Biggers (3):
x86/fpu: Add fpu_save_state() for __save_processor_state()
x86/pm: Use fpu_save_state() in __save_processor_state()
x86/fpu: Don't support kernel-mode FPU when irqs_disabled()
arch/x86/include/asm/fpu/api.h | 1 +
arch/x86/kernel/fpu/core.c | 92 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------
arch/x86/power/cpu.c | 18 +++----
3 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)
base-commit: 8566fc3b96539e3235909d6bdda198e1282beaed
--
2.49.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists