Re: [PATCH 0/3]: x86, fpu: unlazy_fpu fixes/cleanups

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 01/29, Dave Hansen wrote:
>
> On 01/29/2015 01:56 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > --- x/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
> > +++ x/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
> > @@ -313,7 +313,7 @@ dotraplinkage void do_bounds(struct pt_r
> >  	 * It is not directly accessible, though, so we need to
> >  	 * do an xsave and then pull it out of the xsave buffer.
> >  	 */
> > -	fpu_save_init(&tsk->thread.fpu);
> > +	unlazy_fpu(tsk);
> >  	xsave_buf = &(tsk->thread.fpu.state->xsave);
> ...
> > 	bndcsr = get_xsave_addr(xsave_buf, XSTATE_BNDCSR);
>
> Hmm, if the the thread was not using the FPU, and this fails to save
> anything in to the xsave_buf, what will bndcsr point to?  It _looks_ to
> me like it will just point to uninitialized data since the xsave never
> happened.
>
> Fenghua, shouldn't get_xsave_addr() be checking the xstate bit against
> the xsave->xstate_bv?

Can't really comment, but let me clarify what I meant just in case...

If it was not using FPU then I guess do_bounds() can't happen. However,
it can be preempted after conditional_sti(). fpu_save_init() is obviously
wrong unless __thread_has_fpu() == T, and this can be false if !eagerfpu
or if we add TIF_LOAD_FPU (defer FPU restore until return to userspace).

Oleg.

--
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/