From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754030AbbCGKgT (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sat, 7 Mar 2015 05:36:19 -0500
Received: from mail-wg0-f42.google.com ([74.125.82.42]:44486 "EHLO
	mail-wg0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753003AbbCGKgS (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 7 Mar 2015 05:36:18 -0500
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 11:36:13 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Pekka Riikonen <priikone@iki.fi>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Suresh Siddha <sbsiddha@gmail.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Quentin Casasnovas <quentin.casasnovas@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/fpu: math_state_restore() should not blindly
 disable irqs
Message-ID: <20150307103613.GB9378@gmail.com>
References: <54F74F59.5070107@intel.com>
 <20150305195127.GA12657@redhat.com>
 <20150305195149.GB12657@redhat.com>
 <20150305201101.GA21571@gmail.com>
 <20150305212532.GA16890@redhat.com>
 <20150306075833.GA623@gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFzaQqR7xcHSoW_bwb_t6Cf4wiJ9LyRw3i_GSRHiGRvfDA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALCETrV8dx7u=HA-Ex8NKjPuWqb0g9s5o+6DVJcx_oO+VUs96w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFyTLizoFNxxy8sK33H-O1i7xsv0tuXiLfj9gO-ZimOpUg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALCETrUvbnkVTKDVtgnXYPGiXDY621sY9MbOrCvjmpqG8xz-wA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrUvbnkVTKDVtgnXYPGiXDY621sY9MbOrCvjmpqG8xz-wA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 2:00 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Please don't.  IMO it's really nice that we don't use trap gates at
> >> all on x86_64, and I find the conditional_sti thing much nicer than
> >> having to audit all of the entry code to see whether it's safe to run
> >> it with IRQs on.
> >
> > So I'm not sure I see much difference, but I'd certainly be ok with
> > just moving the "conditional_sti()" up unconditionally to be the first
> > thing in do_device_not_available().
> 
> I'd be fine with that.  The important difference is that it's after swapgs.

The thing is, we have to be careful about NMI contexts anyway. So how 
about being careful in irq contexts as well?

We could shave a good 10 cycles from the FPU trap overhead, maybe 
more?

We could save the same 10 cycles from page fault overhead as well, 
AFAICS.

Hm?

Thanks,

	Ingo