On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 11:27:47AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> But we'd need to get to a point where we are calling 'xsaves' with a
> Requested Feature BitMask (aka RFBM[]) that had holes in it. As it
> stands today, we always call it with RFBM=-1 and so we always have
> XCOMP_BV = XCR0.
>
> We'd need to determine which fields are in the init state before we do
> an xsaves.
Btw, do we have any perf data as to the improvement the compacted
variant brings?
I mean, it means a bunch of jumping through hoops in SW but is it worth
it?
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
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/
