mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hans Rosenfeld <hans.rosenfeld@amd.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
	"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"mingo@elte.hu" <mingo@elte.hu>,
	"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"suresh.b.siddha@intel.com" <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
	"eranian@google.com" <eranian@google.com>,
	"Richter, Robert" <robert.richter@amd.com>,
	"Herrmann3, Andreas" <Andreas.Herrmann3@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 8/8] x86, xsave: remove lazy allocation of xstate area
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:11:46 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110330131146.GO13@escobedo.osrc.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D91FA76.1010908@zytor.com>

On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 11:27:50AM -0400, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 03/29/2011 07:17 AM, Hans Rosenfeld wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm not sure I like this.  I did a quick test on 64-bit, and found
> >> that while most if not all user processes allocated the fpu save area
> >> (probably because of glibc blindly initializing the fpu), kernel
> >> threads did not.  This patch would force kernel threads to allocate
> >> memory they would never use.
> > 
> > Yes, up to a few kilobytes would be wasted by kernel threads. The
> > related code gets much simpler. I think that is a good thing.
> > 
> 
> This is silly.  It shouldn't be very hard to allocate this for user
> threads while avoiding the allocation for kernel threads.  The only
> excuse for allocating it for user threads is if it becomes part of the
> kernel stack allocation.

The allocation itself is not what I'm concerned about. I'm more worried
about the code that always has to check whether a thread has a xstate
area allocated or not. But I will try and find out to get this done the
way you suggested.


Meanwhile, could you please review the other patches? They are much more
important to me.


Hans


-- 
%SYSTEM-F-ANARCHISM, The operating system has been overthrown


  reply	other threads:[~2011-03-30 13:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-03-09 19:14 [RFC 0/8] rework of extended state handling, LWP support Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-09 19:14 ` [RFC 1/8] x86, xsave: cleanup fpu/xsave support Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-09 19:14 ` [RFC 2/8] x86, xsave: rework " Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-09 19:14 ` [RFC 3/8] x86, xsave: cleanup fpu/xsave signal frame setup Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-09 19:14 ` [RFC 4/8] x86, xsave: remove unused code Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-09 19:14 ` [RFC 5/8] x86, xsave: more cleanups Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-09 19:15 ` [RFC 6/8] x86, xsave: add support for non-lazy xstates Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-09 19:15 ` [RFC 7/8] x86, xsave: add kernel support for AMDs Lightweight Profiling (LWP) Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-09 19:15 ` [RFC 8/8] x86, xsave: remove lazy allocation of xstate area Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-23 15:27   ` [RFC v2 0/8] x86, xsave: rework of extended state handling, LWP support Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-23 15:27   ` [RFC v2 1/8] x86, xsave: cleanup fpu/xsave support Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-23 15:27   ` [RFC v2 2/8] x86, xsave: rework " Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-23 15:27   ` [RFC v2 3/8] x86, xsave: cleanup fpu/xsave signal frame setup Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-23 15:27   ` [RFC v2 4/8] x86, xsave: remove unused code Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-23 15:27   ` [RFC v2 5/8] x86, xsave: more cleanups Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-23 15:27   ` [RFC v2 6/8] x86, xsave: add support for non-lazy xstates Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-23 15:27   ` [RFC v2 7/8] x86, xsave: add kernel support for AMDs Lightweight Profiling (LWP) Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-23 15:27   ` [RFC v2 8/8] x86, xsave: remove lazy allocation of xstate area Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-24 11:39     ` Brian Gerst
2011-03-29 14:17       ` Hans Rosenfeld
2011-03-29 15:27         ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-03-30 13:11           ` Hans Rosenfeld [this message]
2011-04-05 15:50           ` [RFC v3 0/8] x86, xsave: rework of extended state handling, LWP support Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-07  7:23             ` Ingo Molnar
2011-04-07 15:30               ` Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-07 16:08                 ` [RFC v4 6/8] x86, xsave: add support for non-lazy xstates Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-07 16:08                 ` [RFC v4 8/8] x86, xsave: remove lazy allocation of xstate area Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-13 10:58                 ` [PATCH] x86, xsave: fix non-lazy allocation of the xsave area Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-13 23:21                   ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-04-15 16:47                     ` [PATCH 1/1] " Hans Rosenfeld
2011-05-16 19:10               ` [RFC v3 0/8] x86, xsave: rework of extended state handling, LWP support Hans Rosenfeld
2011-05-17 11:30                 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-17 15:22                   ` Hans Rosenfeld
2011-05-18 11:22                     ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-18 13:51                     ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-18  8:16                   ` Joerg Roedel
2011-05-18 10:59                     ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-18 18:02                   ` Andreas Herrmann
2011-04-05 15:50           ` [RFC v3 1/8] x86, xsave: cleanup fpu/xsave support Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-05 15:50           ` [RFC v3 2/8] x86, xsave: rework " Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-05 15:50           ` [RFC v3 3/8] x86, xsave: cleanup fpu/xsave signal frame setup Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-05 15:50           ` [RFC v3 4/8] x86, xsave: remove unused code Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-05 15:50           ` [RFC v3 5/8] x86, xsave: more cleanups Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-05 15:50           ` [RFC v3 6/8] x86, xsave: add support for non-lazy xstates Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-05 15:50           ` [RFC v3 7/8] x86, xsave: add kernel support for AMDs Lightweight Profiling (LWP) Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-06 22:06             ` [tip:x86/xsave] " tip-bot for Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-05 15:50           ` [RFC v3 8/8] x86, xsave: remove lazy allocation of xstate area Hans Rosenfeld
2011-04-06 22:06             ` [tip:x86/xsave] " tip-bot for Hans Rosenfeld

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20110330131146.GO13@escobedo.osrc.amd.com \
    --to=hans.rosenfeld@amd.com \
    --cc=Andreas.Herrmann3@amd.com \
    --cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
    --cc=eranian@google.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=robert.richter@amd.com \
    --cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome