From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: bhutchings@solarflare.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com,
x86@kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86_64: Define 128-bit memory-mapped I/O operations
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 20:24:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <503450E2.2040504@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120821.193446.1534561579811962053.davem@davemloft.net>
On 08/21/2012 07:34 PM, David Miller wrote:
>
> I really hope we eventually get rid of this rediculous restriction the
> x86 code has.
>
> It really needs a proper stack of FPU state saves like sparc64 has.
>
> Half of the code and complexity in arch/x86/crypto/ would just
> disappear, because most of it has to do with handling this obtuse
> FPU usage restriction which shouldn't even be an issue in the first
> place.
>
> I continually see more and more code that has to check this
> irq_fpu_usable() thing, and have ugly fallback code, and therefore is
> a sign that this really needs to be fixed properly.
>
[Cc: Linus, since he has had very strong opinions on this in the past.]
I'm all ears... tell me how sparc64 deals with this, maybe we can
implement something similar. At the same time, do keep in mind that on
x86 this is not just a matter of the FPU state, but the entire "extended
state" which can be very large.
Given the cost of state save/enable, however, nothing is going to change
the need for kernel_fpu_begin/end, nor the fact that those things will
want to bracket large regions.
-hpa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-22 3:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-22 1:17 [PATCH 0/3] x86_64, sfc: 128-bit memory-mapped I/O Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 1:20 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86_64: Define 128-bit types for kernel code only Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 1:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86_64: Define 128-bit memory-mapped I/O operations Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 1:37 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-22 2:04 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 2:34 ` David Miller
2012-08-22 3:24 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2012-08-22 3:29 ` David Miller
2012-08-22 3:49 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-22 3:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 3:59 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-22 4:14 ` David Miller
2012-08-22 21:14 ` David Miller
2012-08-22 21:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 21:38 ` David Miller
2012-08-22 4:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 5:00 ` David Miller
2012-08-22 14:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 4:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 13:26 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 14:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 14:24 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 14:30 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2012-08-22 14:58 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 15:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-22 15:27 ` David Laight
2012-08-22 15:49 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-22 15:51 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 15:54 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-22 16:44 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 16:49 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-22 16:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 17:09 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 17:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-22 17:27 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 17:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 18:11 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 18:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-22 18:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 19:01 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 17:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 16:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 16:59 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-22 15:51 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-22 14:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 14:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 15:05 ` David Laight
2012-08-22 15:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-08-22 15:41 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 14:42 ` David Laight
2012-08-22 1:26 ` [PATCH 3/3] sfc: Use __raw_writeo() to perform TX descriptor push where possible Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 1:38 ` [PATCH 0/3] x86_64, sfc: 128-bit memory-mapped I/O H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-22 1:43 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 1:59 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-08-22 2:10 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-22 2:31 ` H. Peter Anvin
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=503450E2.2040504@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=bhutchings@solarflare.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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.