Re: [PATCH v2 01/17] asm: simd context helper API
From: Thomas Gleixner
Date: Sun Aug 26 2018 - 10:06:55 EST
On Sun, 26 Aug 2018, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 6:10 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I'm not too fond of this simply because it requires that relax() step in
> > all code pathes. I'd rather make that completely transparent by just
> > marking the task as FPU using and let the context switch code deal with it
> > in case that it gets preempted. I'll let one of my engineers look into
> > that next week.
> Do you mean to say you intend to make kernel_fpu_end() and
> kernel_neon_end() only actually do something upon context switch, but
> not when it's actually called? So that multiple calls to
> kernel_fpu_begin() and kernel_neon_begin() can be made without
On context switch and exit to user. That allows to keep those code pathes
fully preemptible. Still twisting my brain around the details.
> If so, that'd be great, and I'd certainly prefer this to the
> simd_context_t passing. I consider the simd_get/put/relax API a
> stopgap measure until something like that is implemented.
I really want to avoid this stopgap^Wducttape thing.