lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Mar]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/4] x86/fpu: don't abuse drop_init_fpu() in flush_thread()
On 03/13, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 06:35:07PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > drop_init_fpu() makes no sense. We need drop_fpu() and only if
>
> Oh, please explain why. I can try to rhyme it up as something like "we
> don't need to restore FPU context when flushing the thread" but I'm not
> sure...

Hmm. The changelog could be more clear. I'll send v2.

But please look at drop_init_fpu(). If eagerfpu == F it calls drop_fpu() and
this is what we need. flush_thread() already has the "if (!use_eager_fpu())",
we can shift drop_fpu() there.

Otherwise, if eagerfpu == T, drop_init_fpu() does restore_init_xstate() and
this just burns CPU. Until flush_thread user_has_fpu/used_math this state
restore_init_xstate() is pointless, this state will be lost after preemption.

> > + } else if (!used_math()) {
> > /* kthread execs. TODO: cleanup this horror. */
> > if (WARN_ON(init_fpu(current)))
> > force_sig(SIGKILL, current);
>
> Also, can we clean up the tsk/current usage here?
>
> We assign current to tsk and we work with it but then later use current
> again. Needlessly confusing.

Agreed, will do.

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-03-13 16:21    [W:0.071 / U:11.256 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site