mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 04/11] x86,fpu: defer FPU restore until return to userspace
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 13:13:34 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54B5604E.1070403@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrXRs7AgTEgDV93RA=5_Of--W9Q4H+oVVbZPrDeWRs8Y_g@mail.gmail.com>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/13/2015 12:57 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> wrote: On 01/13/2015 12:18 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

>>>> - Task is not current and FPU is in memory. - Task is not
>>>> current and FPU is loaded into some cpu.
> 
>> Same for this one. When the task is not current, the FPU state 
>> will have been saved to memory. If we try running the task 
>> somewhere else, it devolves to "FPU is in memory".
> 
> 
> Isn't there a case where the FPU is in memory *and* in the cpu
> regs? Isn't that how you can skip reloading the FPU after going
> idle and returning?  Is this what fpu_lazy_restore is for?
> Confused.

Indeed, if we end up running the task on the same CPU again, and the
FPU still has the state loaded, we may skip restoring the FPU state.

>>>> Am I missing anything?  (In lazy mode, there are a few more 
>>>> involving CR0.TS.)
>>>> 
>>>> That's five states, plus an optional cpu number.  But we have
>>>> tons of state variable that can express all kinds of nonsense
>>>> things.
>>>> 
>>>> If we asserted that we were in a sensible state and fixed
>>>> the things that exited the sensible states, maybe this would
>>>> be easier to understand and debug.
> 
> Lets see what things we could test, at different points.
> 
> 1) At context switch time, we need to make sure that the previous
> task will no longer have __thread_has_fpu()
> 
> 2) When loading the FPU state, we need to make sure that the
> current task does not have __thread_has_fpu()
> 
>> Examples, any of which may be wrong:
> 
>> If !current, then !TIF_LOAD_FPU

We set TIF_LOAD_CPU on the next task at context switch time,
which is different from the current task. I suspect we can
deal with that exception, though :)

What we can test is that "new" does not already have TIF_LOAD_CPU
set...

>> If switching out a task with TIF_LOAD_FPU set, then !has_fpu

... and that old does not have both TIF_LOAD_FPU and has_fpu.

>> If last_cpu == smp_processor_id(), then fpu_owner == fpu.

Not necessarily, since the task may not have entered userspace in
a very long time, so it may not have loaded its FPU context.

>> If has_fpu, then the task must be current somewhere and last_cpu
>> must be the cpu on which it's current.

Indeed, if has_fpu, then last_cpu must match the current cpu.


- -- 
All rights reversed
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUtWBOAAoJEM553pKExN6DNwIH/2wzfLqqM1V/Asd29nidDUrw
zD7HN//LyWTLjNMfAS4M/rOk3LsbphFBOo2L5BE7CYoNAGEWwKcQi7ld3dDAXeZL
+AkRtzMNEU1NqzrtnpGhABBrn3wBXwr9ldKSlaVQhYUop3q5Hhg8lyo2v+wWKf7y
ULi/RLiERS72tUomFXTE4RT021N2h+tl42jSREEyT0+VqEc7vqTlb5fctsF3VAhS
g48fX/VOYit3rXFU9hPz9m9vnodsEGCapdRxsXaE4xA7lg8dZ5WsaAos2TUwPQYt
EyCbS9z2Yzy1UpySwZudo6OGbQIaugOtgrcCS/cvdvlRb8K4mLe+807MPGmBOGA=
=7wEX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  reply	other threads:[~2015-01-13 18:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 76+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-11 21:46 [RFC PATCH 0/11 BROKEN] move FPU context loading to userspace switch riel
2015-01-11 21:46 ` [RFC PATCH 01/11] x86,fpu: document the data structures a little riel
2015-01-12 21:18   ` Borislav Petkov
2015-01-12 21:38     ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-12 21:52   ` Dave Hansen
2015-01-13 15:59     ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-11 21:46 ` [RFC PATCH 02/11] x86,fpu: replace fpu_switch_t with a thread flag riel
2015-01-13 15:24   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-13 16:35     ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-13 16:55       ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-11 21:46 ` [RFC PATCH 03/11] x86,fpu: move __thread_fpu_begin to when the task has the fpu riel
2015-01-13 15:24   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-13 16:37     ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-11 21:46 ` [RFC PATCH 04/11] x86,fpu: defer FPU restore until return to userspace riel
2015-01-13 15:53   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-13 17:07   ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-01-13 17:11   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-13 17:18     ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-01-13 17:44       ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-13 17:57         ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-01-13 18:13           ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2015-01-13 18:26             ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-01-13 17:54     ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-13 18:22       ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-13 18:30         ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-13 20:06           ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-14 17:56             ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-13 17:58   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-13 19:32     ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-11 21:46 ` [RFC PATCH 05/11] x86,fpu: ensure FPU state is reloaded from memory if task is traced riel
2015-01-13 16:19   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-13 16:33     ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-13 16:50       ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-13 16:57         ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-11 21:46 ` [RFC PATCH 06/11] x86,fpu: lazily skip fpu restore with eager fpu mode, too riel
2015-01-13 17:11   ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-01-13 20:43     ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-14 18:36   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-15  2:49     ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-15 19:34       ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-11 21:46 ` [RFC PATCH 07/11] x86,fpu: store current fpu pointer, instead of fpu_owner_task riel
2015-01-11 21:46 ` [RFC PATCH 08/11] x86,fpu: restore user FPU state lazily after __kernel_fpu_end riel
2015-01-14 18:43   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-14 19:08     ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-11 21:46 ` [RFC PATCH 09/11] x86,fpu,kvm: keep vcpu FPU active as long as it is resident riel
2015-01-11 21:46 ` [RFC PATCH 10/11] x86,fpu: fix fpu_copy to deal with not-loaded fpu riel
2015-01-11 21:46 ` [RFC PATCH 11/11] (BROKEN) x86,fpu: broken signal handler stack setup riel
2015-01-15 19:19 ` [PATCH 0/3] x86, fpu: kernel_fpu_begin/end initial cleanups/fix Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-15 19:19   ` [PATCH 1/3] x86, fpu: introduce per-cpu "bool in_kernel_fpu" Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-16  2:22     ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-20 12:54     ` [tip:x86/fpu] x86, fpu: Introduce per-cpu in_kernel_fpu state tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-15 19:20   ` [PATCH 2/3] x86, fpu: don't abuse ->has_fpu in __kernel_fpu_{begin,end}() Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-16  2:27     ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-16 15:54       ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-16 16:07         ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-20 12:55     ` [tip:x86/fpu] x86, fpu: Don't abuse has_fpu in __kernel_fpu_begin /end() tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-15 19:20   ` [PATCH 3/3] x86, fpu: fix math_state_restore() race with kernel_fpu_begin() Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-16  2:30     ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-16 16:03       ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-20 12:55     ` [tip:x86/fpu] x86, fpu: Fix " tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-19 18:51   ` [PATCH 0/3] x86, fpu: more eagerfpu cleanups Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-19 18:51     ` [PATCH 1/3] x86, fpu: __kernel_fpu_begin() should clear fpu_owner_task even if use_eager_fpu() Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-20 14:15       ` Rik van Riel
2015-02-20 18:13       ` Borislav Petkov
2015-03-03 11:27       ` [tip:x86/fpu] x86/fpu: " tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-19 18:51     ` [PATCH 2/3] x86, fpu: always allow FPU in interrupt " Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-20 14:46       ` Rik van Riel
2015-01-20 22:46       ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-02-20 21:48       ` Borislav Petkov
2015-03-03 11:28       ` [tip:x86/fpu] x86/fpu: Always " tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-19 18:52     ` [PATCH 3/3] x86, fpu: don't abuse FPU in kernel threads " Oleg Nesterov
2015-01-20 14:53       ` Rik van Riel
2015-02-23 15:31       ` Borislav Petkov
2015-03-03 11:28       ` [tip:x86/fpu] x86/fpu: Don' t " tip-bot for Oleg Nesterov
2015-02-20 12:10     ` [PATCH 0/3] x86, fpu: more eagerfpu cleanups Borislav Petkov
2015-02-20 13:30       ` Oleg Nesterov

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=54B5604E.1070403@redhat.com \
    --to=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=bp@suse.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=matt.fleming@intel.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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