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 S1757273AbbGQIpf (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 17 Jul 2015 04:45:35 -0400
Received: from mail-wg0-f54.google.com ([74.125.82.54]:34435 "EHLO
	mail-wg0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752309AbbGQIpc (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 17 Jul 2015 04:45:32 -0400
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:45:27 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] x86, fpu: dynamically allocate 'struct fpu'
Message-ID: <20150717084527.GC16130@gmail.com>
References: <20150716191437.A334FF2E@viggo.jf.intel.com>
 <CALCETrUfyOWErpQgjyKdmbdJy4RhF3Kz5VtieUQP1vxduox4rw@mail.gmail.com>
 <55A8221E.8030108@sr71.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <55A8221E.8030108@sr71.net>
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


* Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net> wrote:

> >>  #endif /* _ASM_X86_FPU_H */
> >> diff -puN arch/x86/kernel/process.c~dynamically-allocate-struct-fpu arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c~dynamically-allocate-struct-fpu 2015-07-16 10:50:42.360571875 -0700
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c 2015-07-16 12:00:59.204808551 -0700
> >> @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(idle_notifier_unregist
> >>   */
> >>  int arch_dup_task_struct(struct task_struct *dst, struct task_struct *src)
> >>  {
> >> -       *dst = *src;
> >> +       memcpy(dst, src, arch_task_struct_size());
> > 
> > This is actually vaguely performance-critical, which makes me thing
> > that using some kind of inline or other real way (config macro, ifdef,
> > etc) to detect whether there's an arch override would be better than a
> > weak function.
> 
> Fair enough.  I'll send out another version in a bit if there are no more 
> comments.

Beyond making it a build time switch for other architectures, I'd also suggest 
introducing a __read_mostly task_struct_size variable on x86, so that we can 
write:

	memcpy(dst, src, task_struct_size);

Thanks,

	Ingo