linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] x86/fpu: Simplify the fpu->last_cpu logic and rename it to fpu->fpregs_cached
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 16:09:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170126150955.GA12274@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1485442458.15964.50.camel@redhat.com>


* Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 12:26 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > index c56fb57f2991..7eb2f3041fde 100644
> > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> > @@ -1253,6 +1253,8 @@ void set_task_cpu(struct task_struct *p,
> > unsigned int new_cpu)
> >  			p->sched_class->migrate_task_rq(p);
> >  		p->se.nr_migrations++;
> >  		perf_event_task_migrate(p);
> > +
> > +		arch_task_migrate(p);
> >  	}
> > 
> 
> Does it really count as a "simplification" if you add a
> scheduler callback?
> 
> This code does not seem any easier to understand than
> the old code...

See the extra commit I added on top:

  7deff4369276 x86/fpu: Unify the naming of the FPU register cache validity flags

which makes it clearer, we now have:
	
	->fpregs_owner             [bool]
          fpregs_owner_ctx         [ptr]

That are set to 1 and the context pointer when a task with no FPU state is 
scheduled in and where the state of the previous task is preserved (cached) in the 
FPU registers - and which FPU register state cache can be invalidated after this 
by clearing any of the two flags.

That should make its overall meaning clearer, in that they represent a single 
'cache' where the cache validity flag is split into two copies, where any of which 
can be used to invalidate the cache.

Thanks,

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-26 15:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-26 11:26 [PATCH 0/7] x86/fpu: Simplify the FPU state machine Ingo Molnar
2017-01-26 11:26 ` [PATCH 1/7] x86/fpu: Simplify the fpu->last_cpu logic and rename it to fpu->fpregs_cached Ingo Molnar
2017-01-26 14:23   ` Rik van Riel
2017-01-26 14:53     ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-26 15:05       ` [PATCH] x86/fpu: Unify the naming of the FPU register cache validity flags Ingo Molnar
2017-01-26 15:31         ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-01-26 14:54   ` [PATCH 1/7] x86/fpu: Simplify the fpu->last_cpu logic and rename it to fpu->fpregs_cached Rik van Riel
2017-01-26 15:09     ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2017-01-26 16:51     ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-26 11:26 ` [PATCH 2/7] x86/fpu: Simplify fpu->fpregs_active use Ingo Molnar
2017-01-26 16:30   ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-26 11:26 ` [PATCH 3/7] x86/fpu: Make the fpu state change in fpu__clear() scheduler-atomic Ingo Molnar
2017-01-26 11:26 ` [PATCH 4/7] x86/fpu: Split the state handling in fpu__drop() Ingo Molnar
2017-01-26 11:26 ` [PATCH 5/7] x86/fpu: Change fpu->fpregs_active users to fpu->fpstate_active Ingo Molnar
2017-01-26 14:44   ` Rik van Riel
2017-01-26 15:16     ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-26 15:45       ` Rik van Riel
2017-01-26 15:53         ` Ingo Molnar
2017-01-26 17:00           ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-26 18:04             ` Rik van Riel
2017-01-26 11:26 ` [PATCH 6/7] x86/fpu: Decouple fpregs_activate()/fpregs_deactivate() from fpu->fpregs_active Ingo Molnar
2017-01-26 11:26 ` [PATCH 7/7] x86/fpu: Remove struct fpu::fpregs_active Ingo Molnar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170126150955.GA12274@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=yu-cheng.yu@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).