On 2014-07-24, Hansen, Dave wrote:
> On 07/23/2014 05:56 PM, Ren, Qiaowei wrote:
>> On 2014-07-24, Hansen, Dave wrote:
>>> On 07/22/2014 07:35 PM, Ren, Qiaowei wrote:
The checking about MPX feature should be as follow:
if (pcntxt_mask & XSTATE_EAGER) {
On 07/23/2014 05:56 PM, Ren, Qiaowei wrote:
> On 2014-07-24, Hansen, Dave wrote:
>> On 07/22/2014 07:35 PM, Ren, Qiaowei wrote:
>>> The checking about MPX feature should be as follow:
>>>
>>> if (pcntxt_mask & XSTATE_EAGER) {
>>> if (eagerfpu == DISABLE) {
>>>
On 2014-07-24, Hansen, Dave wrote:
> On 07/22/2014 07:35 PM, Ren, Qiaowei wrote:
>> The checking about MPX feature should be as follow:
>>
>> if (pcntxt_mask & XSTATE_EAGER) {
>> if (eagerfpu == DISABLE) {
>> pr_err("eagerfpu not present, disabling
On 07/22/2014 07:35 PM, Ren, Qiaowei wrote:
> The checking about MPX feature should be as follow:
>
> if (pcntxt_mask & XSTATE_EAGER) {
> if (eagerfpu == DISABLE) {
> pr_err("eagerfpu not present, disabling some xstate
> features: 0x%llx\n",
>
On 2014-07-23, Hansen, Dave wrote:
> On 07/20/2014 10:38 PM, Qiaowei Ren wrote:
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MPX
>> +#define cpu_has_mpx boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MPX) #else #define
>> +cpu_has_mpx 0 #endif /* CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MPX */
>
> Is this enough checking? Looking at the extension reference
On 07/20/2014 10:38 PM, Qiaowei Ren wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MPX
> +#define cpu_has_mpx boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MPX)
> +#else
> +#define cpu_has_mpx 0
> +#endif /* CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MPX */
Is this enough checking? Looking at the extension reference, it says:
> 9.3.3
> Enabling of Intel
In order to do performance optimization, this patch adds macro
cpu_has_mpx which will directly return 0 when MPX is not supported
by kernel.
Community gave a lot of comments on this macro cpu_has_mpx in previous
version. Dave will introduce a patchset about disabled features to fix
it later.
In t
7 matches
Mail list logo