![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Alan Cox wrote: > > > 1. Would it be sufficient to just bracket all fpu-using code code by > > kernel_fpu_begin()/kernel_fpu_end()? If not, what problems could I > > run into? > > You can do that providing you dont > > > 2. Would it be OK to go to sleep inside such a region, or should I > > take care to avoid that? > > You can't sleep in such a region - there is nowhere left to store the > FPU context > > > 3. Perhaps I should call init_fpu() at some point as well? If so, > > should it be done before or after kernel_fpu_begin()? > > After > > > 4. Is there any difference between doing this in the context of a user > > process (implementation of an ioctl) compared to doing it in a > > daemonized kernel thread (created by a loadable kernel module)? > > The kernel thread is actually easier, you can happily corrupt its user > FPU context by sleeping since you are the only FPU user for the thread. > Not nice, not portable but should work fine on x86 without any of the > above for the moment. > > You should probably also test the FPU is present and handle it accordingly > with polite messages not an oops 8) So are kernel_fpu_begin()/kernel_fpu_end() (and also init_fpu()) necessary in a kernel thread at all ? Does kernel_fpu_begin()/kernel_fpu_end() take care of SSE and MMX registers too (I'm aware of the extra "emms" needed in the MMX case) ? Regards, -- Steffen Persvold | Scalable Linux Systems | Try out the world's best mailto:sp@scali.com | http://www.scali.com | performing MPI implementation: Tel: (+47) 2262 8950 | Olaf Helsets vei 6 | - ScaMPI 1.13.8 - Fax: (+47) 2262 8951 | N0621 Oslo, NORWAY | >320MBytes/s and <4uS latency - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:18 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||