From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <52ED9E7E.6090205@zytor.com> Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2014 17:25:18 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: George Spelvin , torvalds@linux-foundation.org CC: jack@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, maarten-baert@hotmail.com, mingo@kernel.org, nate@thatsmathematics.com, priikone@iki.fi, sbsiddha@gmail.com, stable@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make math_state_restore() save and restore the interrupt flag References: <20140202011931.27901.qmail@science.horizon.com> In-Reply-To: <20140202011931.27901.qmail@science.horizon.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 02/01/2014 05:19 PM, George Spelvin wrote: >> OK, let's circle back for a bit. We have an active bug, and we clearly >> have a lot of restructuring that could/should be done. We need to fix >> the bug first; if we're going to a bunch of restructuring then that >> ought to be separate. The first bit is how we fix the immediate bug. > > Well, that's what the [PATCH] that started this thread,s for which seems > to greatly reduce the incidence. > > The issue being discussed here is the fact that it's far from clear to > people that the result of applying that patch is actually bug-free. > > Given how long it's been in shipping kernels (2.6.26 or 3.10, depending > on what you think causes it to trigger) and how few complaints there > have been, I'm happy to take a while to think about it. > Yes, I would agree with that. I guess I should have said "how do we fix the immediate bug(s) properly." -hpa