On 02/02, r...@redhat.com wrote:
>
> From: Rik van Riel <r...@redhat.com>
>
> With Oleg's patch "x86, fpu: don't abuse FPU in kernel threads if
> use_eager_fpu()", kernel threads no longer have an FPU state even
> on systems with use_eager_fpu()
>
> That in turn means that a task may still have its FPU state
> loaded in the FPU registers, if the task only got interrupted by
> kernel threads from when it went to sleep, to when it woke up
> again.
>
> In that case, there is no need to restore the FPU state for
> this task, since it is still in the registers.
>
> The kernel can simply use the same logic to determine this as
> is used for !use_eager_fpu() systems.
Yes, agreed, I was going to do this too.
And in fact this change make sense even without "don't abuse FPU in kernel
threads", I think.
But in theory it depends on another change, "__kernel_fpu_begin() should
clear fpu_owner_task even if use_eager_fpu()".
And that series was ignored ;)
I think this patch is fine.
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/fpu-internal.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/fpu-internal.h
> @@ -457,7 +457,7 @@ static inline fpu_switch_t switch_fpu_prepare(struct
> task_struct *old, struct ta
> task_disable_lazy_fpu_restore(old);
> if (fpu.preload) {
> new->thread.fpu_counter++;
> - if (!use_eager_fpu() && fpu_lazy_restore(new, cpu))
> + if (fpu_lazy_restore(new, cpu))
> fpu.preload = 0;
> else
> prefetch(new->thread.fpu.state);
> --
> 1.9.3
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
