From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965605AbbDVP0e (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Apr 2015 11:26:34 -0400 Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:34545 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965564AbbDVP0c (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Apr 2015 11:26:32 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 17:26:46 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Borislav Petkov cc: Dave Hansen , Oleg Nesterov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, riel@redhat.com, sbsiddha@gmail.com, luto@amacapital.net, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, fenghua.yu@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/16] x86, fpu: wrap get_xsave_addr() to make it safer In-Reply-To: <20150422152121.GI6897@pd.tnic> Message-ID: References: <20150401004623.894DF37A@viggo.jf.intel.com> <20150401004624.49096AD0@viggo.jf.intel.com> <20150422104047.GA6897@pd.tnic> <20150422131618.GA16785@redhat.com> <20150422133146.GE6897@pd.tnic> <5537B6AD.6070507@sr71.net> <20150422152121.GI6897@pd.tnic> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 22 Apr 2015, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 05:17:08PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > Is there a reason to have the task argument at all if thats only > > intended for current? > > Right, so I think we either use @tsk everywhere or disable preemption in > the whole function if using current. But I think we want to use @tsk... Why should we disable preemption? Thanks, tglx