From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] KVM: x86: Use FPU API Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 11:06:54 +0300 Message-ID: <4BEE561E.5020607@redhat.com> References: <1273807013-4792-1-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com> <1273807013-4792-4-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Sheng Yang Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1273807013-4792-4-git-send-email-sheng@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 05/14/2010 06:16 AM, Sheng Yang wrote: > Convert KVM to use generic FPU API. > > Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang > --- > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 18 +--------- > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 73 ++++++++++++--------------------------- > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > index ed48904..beba6f5 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > @@ -300,8 +300,7 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_arch { > unsigned long mmu_seq; > } update_pte; > > - struct i387_fxsave_struct host_fx_image; > - struct i387_fxsave_struct guest_fx_image; > + struct fpu host_fpu, guest_fpu; > > Do we really need host_fpu? I think we can call unlazy_fpu() instead and drop host_fpu completely. This might reduce the need for changes in patch 1 (as well as generally improving the code). -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.