From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755961AbbCMO6H (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Mar 2015 10:58:07 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45415 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755599AbbCMO55 (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Mar 2015 10:57:57 -0400 Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 15:55:42 +0100 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Dave Hansen , Ingo Molnar , Andy Lutomirski , Linus Torvalds , Pekka Riikonen , Rik van Riel , Suresh Siddha , LKML , "Yu, Fenghua" , Quentin Casasnovas Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] x86/fpu: don't abuse drop_init_fpu() in flush_thread() Message-ID: <20150313145542.GD21603@redhat.com> References: <54F74F59.5070107@intel.com> <20150311173346.GB5032@redhat.com> <20150311173507.GF5032@redhat.com> <20150313105251.GD31998@pd.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150313105251.GD31998@pd.tnic> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/13, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 06:35:07PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > drop_init_fpu() makes no sense. We need drop_fpu() and only if > > Oh, please explain why. I can try to rhyme it up as something like "we > don't need to restore FPU context when flushing the thread" but I'm not > sure... Hmm. The changelog could be more clear. I'll send v2. But please look at drop_init_fpu(). If eagerfpu == F it calls drop_fpu() and this is what we need. flush_thread() already has the "if (!use_eager_fpu())", we can shift drop_fpu() there. Otherwise, if eagerfpu == T, drop_init_fpu() does restore_init_xstate() and this just burns CPU. Until flush_thread user_has_fpu/used_math this state restore_init_xstate() is pointless, this state will be lost after preemption. > > + } else if (!used_math()) { > > /* kthread execs. TODO: cleanup this horror. */ > > if (WARN_ON(init_fpu(current))) > > force_sig(SIGKILL, current); > > Also, can we clean up the tsk/current usage here? > > We assign current to tsk and we work with it but then later use current > again. Needlessly confusing. Agreed, will do. Oleg.