On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, George Spelvin wrote:
I'm trying it now. But it takes a while for me to reproduce, and even
longer to be sure the problem has gone away. So anything you hear from
me within a week will be bad news.
Well, it's been a week, and: good news!
I'd still wish for some review by someone who really understands this
code; in particular it seems dangerous to just enable interrupts for
a window without re-checking the condition afterward.
Yeah, I was thinking the same. If interrupts were disabled on entry it
was probably for a good reason, and it is strange for math_state_restore()
and/or kernel_fpu_end() to unilaterally enable them. Maybe the caller is
supposed to know this and account for it, but I didn't see any
documentation of the intended semantics of kernel_fpu_{begin,end}() with
respect to interrupts. The current behavior doesn't really make sense
either way, but it does make me wonder if something deeper is wrong.
[...]
But this patch clearly doesn't make these issues any *worse*, so
these concerns are no reason to block it.
Would you like add an appropriate commit message and send in the patch?
Ok, when I have a chance I will write something up and send it in, and
maybe having it as a formal patch submission will get more attention.
Thanks, George!
--
Nate Eldredge
[email protected]
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
