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 S965792AbbCPP1s (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:27:48 -0400
Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:48711 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S934320AbbCPP1m (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 16 Mar 2015 11:27:42 -0400
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 16:26:09 +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: <20150316152609.GM22995@pd.tnic>
References: <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>
 <20150315203816.GC29134@pd.tnic>
 <20150316093537.GC22995@pd.tnic>
 <20150316143944.GA3300@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150316143944.GA3300@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 Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 03:39:44PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> ACK!

Thanks.

> Perhaps you can also find a beter name for __save_init_fpu/etc ;) The
> name clearly suggests that it does "save + init" while in fact it does
> "save and may be destroy FPU state". At least for the callers, the fact
> that "destroy" is actually "init" doesn't really matter.
> 
> But lets not rename it right now. This can conflict with the fixes we
> need to do first.

Right, so I think we should do fixes/cleanups first so that we can lose
all the fat/cruft this code has grown. I'll make looking at that code
easier later.

I'll push out everything I have collected so far for people to see after
I've finished bisecting another tip/master regression from today.

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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