Re: [PATCH 5/6] x86,fpu: also check fpu_lazy_restore when use_eager_fpu

[Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/02/2015 01:55 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/02, riel@redhat.com wrote:
>> 
>> From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
>> 
>> With Oleg's patch "x86, fpu: don't abuse FPU in kernel threads
>> if use_eager_fpu()", kernel threads no longer have an FPU state
>> even on systems with use_eager_fpu()
>> 
>> That in turn means that a task may still have its FPU state 
>> loaded in the FPU registers, if the task only got interrupted by 
>> kernel threads from when it went to sleep, to when it woke up 
>> again.
>> 
>> In that case, there is no need to restore the FPU state for this
>> task, since it is still in the registers.
>> 
>> The kernel can simply use the same logic to determine this as is
>> used for !use_eager_fpu() systems.
> 
> Yes, agreed, I was going to do this too.
> 
> And in fact this change make sense even without "don't abuse FPU in
> kernel threads", I think.
> 
> But in theory it depends on another change, "__kernel_fpu_begin()
> should clear fpu_owner_task even if use_eager_fpu()".
> 
> And that series was ignored ;)
> 
> I think this patch is fine.

Ingo,

does the FPU code have a sub-maintainer, or should all the
FPU patches go straight through you?

Would it be better for you if FPU patches came through a git
tree you could just pull?

- -- 
All rights reversed
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUz83HAAoJEM553pKExN6DqrQH/iP5cfUUtIqguM4oS19WO33Y
5H/wdjVIGOJw4Rt7U+550Y9m5VMXsuQrO17PagjZGsxbSm9QQhA6esVMDvXfOFH1
taWW1tFog4VTMueNYbOC5asqsicTrhNqfiLQFM9CmJFGOPO4lDQ9n+OPS64CkQ/d
onylevtR4UWjggpEdkoOlmvbQH8RhnaC4JWKSXxP06YBakfP41gIMMfAjFNMP9O4
b/r1nU/WBQsTSX7pzQMnEx/Igp9LkT+X0Y93NerF/0O7gic9Wv7tKTEaUa3DzS7p
U7xgT8xX88AJ6QQGQfB3IQSkjcb3N9UCY1CYkkWqigm9MhhlLxPyRDAy7vkrUlk=
=j/eO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----