Re: [PATCH 02/19] x86, fpu: Wrap get_xsave_addr() to make it safer

[Ingo Molnar]

* Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 06:05:33PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > I would propose that we take the opposite approach and just ban
> > eagerfpu=off when MPX is enabled.  We could then take the next step
> > and default eagerfpu=on for everyone and, if nothing breaks, then just
> > delete lazy mode entirely.
> > 
> > I suspect we'd have to go back to Pentium 3 or earlier to find a CPU
> > on which lazy mode is actually a good idea.
> 
> Last time I checked (and ran some benchmarks) it was only a minute
> slowdown so I say we kill lazy mode if it means significant code
> complexity drop.
> 
> Can I also emulate Greg here and suggest that Pentium 3 people should
> buy newer hw? They should think about the environment, if nothing else.
> 
> :-P

I went back as far as Athon64 and the CR0 manipulation and CR0 faults are overly 
expensive there too.

Ok, you guys convinced me, I'll do a patch for this in tip:x86/fpu, and then 
people can benchmark it.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/