Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86, fpu: introduce per-cpu "bool in_kernel_fpu"

Rik van Riel
2015-01-16T02:22:29Z

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

On 01/15/2015 02:19 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> interrupted_kernel_fpu_idle() tries to detect if
> kernel_fpu_begin() is safe or not. In particular it should
> obviously deny the nested kernel_fpu_begin() and this logic looks
> very confusing.
>
> If use_eager_fpu() == T we rely on a) __thread_has_fpu() check in
> interrupted_kernel_fpu_idle(), and b) on the fact that _begin()
> does __thread_clear_has_fpu().
>
> Otherwise we demand that the interrupted task has no FPU if it is
> in kernel mode, this works because __kernel_fpu_begin() does clts()
> and interrupted_kernel_fpu_idle() checks X86_CR0_TS.
>
> Add the per-cpu "bool in_kernel_fpu" variable, and change this
> code to check/set/clear it. This allows to do more cleanups and
> fixes, see the next changes.
>
> The patch also moves WARN_ON_ONCE() under preempt_disable() just
> to make this_cpu_read() look better, this is not really needed. And
> in fact I think we should move it into __kernel_fpu_begin().
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>

Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>

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

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUuHXTAAoJEM553pKExN6Di2kIAL4HZ8qbOhHOaNKBvAA7uvdj
3uFZcDdgoviKKT5yi4Q/49+AvXulKVxLuwpZoZXy74wID2J2AQ1bEiVkUKXhhbrl
4FKW412VAD61fsAXvGp4n3l++ITTfjX4rL0hk6ntJlegqnI3l2sEYIWGa+Hnlh7e
nTabtEOl3Ib1rkIKlR+6wVgogTzzLxLboGKY0aHHqYZmhlbGzWvnJ04PkgWPGFND
9rQWz/+ZhbBgpeQRQSW8syluswcs/gQah3BygIRnPFW500zDQzihxjssDSd7/X2Z
3lYq+TCWab8EGSpc4kOqgq+LU8nXxggP9nIA7LplqgpnIdAyg4YrxLvyWL5Y2Ys=
=t5LD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----