Re: [PATCH RFC 1/5] x86,fpu: split prev/next task fpu state handling

From	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH RFC 1/5] x86,fpu: split prev/next task fpu state handling
Date	2016-10-04 17:30 +0200
Message-ID	<sozPj-4AX-25@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<snzy1-5k2-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <snzy2-5k2-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <snBTc-71H-25@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On Sat, 2016-10-01 at 16:26 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Oct 1, 2016 1:49 PM, <riel@redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> > 
> > Move all handling of the next state FPU state handling into
> > switch_fpu_finish, in preparation for more lazily switching
> > FPU states.
> > 
> > CR0.TS state is mirrored in a per-cpu variable, instead of
> > being passed around in a local variable, because that will
> > not be possible later in the series.
> 
> This seems reasonable in principle, but IMO it would be less scary if
> you rebased onto this:
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/luto/linux.git/log/?h=x8
> 6/fpu

I can rebase on top of that.

I am perfectly fine with your patches going in
first, and mine later on. Too many FPU changes
at once is risky, anyway.

-- 
All Rights Reversed.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH RFC 0/5] x86,fpu: make FPU context switching much lazier riel@redhat.com - 2016-10-01 23:00 +0200
  [PATCH RFC 1/5] x86,fpu: split prev/next task fpu state handling riel@redhat.com - 2016-10-01 23:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH RFC 1/5] x86,fpu: split prev/next task fpu state handling Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2016-10-02 01:30 +0200
      Re: [PATCH RFC 1/5] x86,fpu: split prev/next task fpu state  handling Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> - 2016-10-04 17:30 +0200

csiph-web