Thread (26 messages) 26 messages, 7 authors, 2017-12-04

Re: [PATCH RT v2] crypto: limit more FPU-enabled sections

From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Date: 2017-12-01 13:33:03
Also in: lkml

On 2017-12-01 12:32:35 [+0100], Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 11:44:22AM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
quoted
+static void camellia_fpu_sched_rt(struct crypt_priv *ctx)
+{
+       bool fpu_enabled = ctx->fpu_enabled;
+
+       if (!fpu_enabled || !tif_need_resched_now())
+               return;
+       camellia_fpu_end(fpu_enabled);
+       kernel_fpu_end();
+       /* schedule due to preemptible */
+       kernel_fpu_begin();
+}
There's a ton of duplication in there; you're not nearly lazy enough.

Why can't we do something simple like kernel_fpu_resched() ?
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/core.c b/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/core.c
index f92a6593de1e..05321b98a55a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/core.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/core.c
@@ -130,6 +130,18 @@ void kernel_fpu_begin(void)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kernel_fpu_begin);
 
+void kernel_fpu_resched(void)
+{
+	WARN_ON_FPU(!this_cpu_read(in_kernel_fpu));
+
+	if (should_resched(PREEMPT_OFFSET)) {
+		kernel_fpu_end();
+		cond_resched();
+		kernel_fpu_begin();
I can do that but I would still keep it RT only to avoid the
kernel_fpu_begin/end to be invoked more often on !RT.
But why that cond_resched()? kernel_fpu_end() ends with preempt_enable()
and this one should do the trick.
+	}
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kernel_fpu_resched);
+
 void kernel_fpu_end(void)
 {
 	__kernel_fpu_end();
Sebastian
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help