All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>
Cc: Dexuan Cui <dexuan.cui@intel.com>,
	Sheng Yang <sheng@linux.intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: eliminate TS_XSAVE
Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 20:44:56 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BDDBA18.3080909@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <u2p73c1f2161005021038gce35c1bbpca6ec119d24e646e@mail.gmail.com>

On 05/02/2010 08:38 PM, Brian Gerst wrote:
> On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Avi Kivity<avi@redhat.com>  wrote:
>    
>> The fpu code currently uses current->thread_info->status&  TS_XSAVE as
>> a way to distinguish between XSAVE capable processors and older processors.
>> The decision is not really task specific; instead we use the task status to
>> avoid a global memory reference - the value should be the same across all
>> threads.
>>
>> Eliminate this tie-in into the task structure by using an alternative
>> instruction keyed off the XSAVE cpu feature; this results in shorter and
>> faster code, without introducing a global memory reference.
>>      
> I think you should either just use cpu_has_xsave, or extend this use
> of alternatives to all cpu features.  It doesn't make sense to only do
> it for xsave.
>    

I was trying to avoid a performance regression relative to the current 
code, as it appears that some care was taken to avoid the memory reference.

I agree that it's probably negligible compared to the save/restore 
code.  If the x86 maintainers agree as well, I'll replace it with 
cpu_has_xsave.

-- 
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.


  reply	other threads:[~2010-05-02 17:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-02 14:53 [PATCH 0/2] x86 FPU API Avi Kivity
2010-05-02 14:53 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: eliminate TS_XSAVE Avi Kivity
2010-05-02 17:38   ` Brian Gerst
2010-05-02 17:44     ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2010-05-03 21:45       ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-04  7:41         ` Avi Kivity
2010-05-04 18:15           ` Suresh Siddha
2010-05-04 18:24             ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-05  7:30               ` Avi Kivity
2010-05-05 12:10                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-05 12:12                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-04 18:03   ` Suresh Siddha
2010-05-02 14:53 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: Introduce 'struct fpu' and related API Avi Kivity
2010-05-04 18:12   ` Suresh Siddha

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4BDDBA18.3080909@redhat.com \
    --to=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
    --cc=dexuan.cui@intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=sheng@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.