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 S1753170AbbCOUju (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 15 Mar 2015 16:39:50 -0400
Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:45469 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751166AbbCOUjt (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 15 Mar 2015 16:39:49 -0400
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 21:38:16 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        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 4/4] x86/fpu: don't abuse drop_init_fpu() in
 flush_thread()
Message-ID: <20150315203816.GC29134@pd.tnic>
References: <20150313105251.GD31998@pd.tnic>
 <20150313145542.GD21603@redhat.com>
 <20150313161958.GI31998@pd.tnic>
 <20150313162654.GA26453@redhat.com>
 <20150313192717.GJ31998@pd.tnic>
 <20150314144816.GA13029@redhat.com>
 <20150315173620.GA29134@pd.tnic>
 <20150315181643.GA488@redhat.com>
 <20150315185048.GB29134@pd.tnic>
 <20150315200436.GA30079@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150315200436.GA30079@redhat.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

On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 09:04:36PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> But please note that it is not only used after the failure.
> See handle_signal() and the first drop_init_fpu() in
> __restore_xstate_sig().

Yeah, that's why I said "In the most places it is used..."

> I think its name is confusing a bit...

Yeah, the "init" aspect affects only the eager case...

How about we call this function fpu_reset_state() instead?

This way it doesn't really need to be documented what it does - it
simply resets the FPU state. And resetting is what we do in all
call sites so the usage dictates the name and then "drop" can be
differentiated from "reset" as "drop" is only a part of the "reset"
operation on an FPU state. And so on and so on...

Hmmm?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--