Hi Dave, On 03/25, Dave Hansen wrote: > > It may get > called on CPUs without eager FPU mode on. > > > http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/daveh/x86-mpx.git/commit/?h=mpx-v16&id=92d3e7c1664f766142904904e27e126888adb8a7 > > http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/daveh/x86-mpx.git/commit/?h=mpx-v16&id=18049953ae43a7ffa084a01613c1684bdf24dd2e > > All that the MPX code wants here is to read the in-memory copy of the > MPX registers, or error out.
Yes, iirc we alredy discussed these fixes ? I still think that the "if (!xstate)" check at the start of tsk_get_xsave_field() will look better, but this is cosmetic. > So, for the purposes of this series: > > With the (so far unmerged to Linus's tree) changes to unlazy_fpu(), does > tsk_get_xsave_field()'s use of unlazy_fpu() look correct? I think yes. But let me remind just in case that this depends on "x86, fpu: unlazy_fpu: don't do __thread_fpu_end() if use_eager_fpu()". > Should we also be renaming tsk_get_xsave_field() to something more > appropriate? Oh, don't ask me ;) To me it looks fine. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
