On 2019-02-13 15:36:30 [+0000], Dave Martin wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 03:30:29PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > On 2019-02-08 16:55:13 [+0000], Julien Grall wrote:
> > > When the kernel is compiled with CONFIG_KERNEL_MODE_NEON, some part of
> > > the kernel may be able to use FPSIMD/SVE. This is for instance the case
> > > for crypto code.
> > >
> > > Any use of FPSIMD/SVE in the kernel are clearly marked by using the
> > > function kernel_neon_{begin, end}. Furthermore, this can only be used
> > > when may_use_simd() returns true.
> >
> > This is equal what x86 is currently doing. The naming is slightly
> > different, there is irq_fpu_usable().
>
> Yes, I think it's basically the same idea.
>
> It's been evolving a bit on both sides, but is quite similar now.
I though that this is complicated and wanted to submit a patch to remove
irq_fpu_usable() and disable BH as part of kernel_fpu_begin() (but have
currently the onother FPU series ongoing which I want to finish first).
…
> "Usually" is probably not good enough if another task can run: if the
> preempting task enters userspace then the vector registers are needed
> for its use, which is tricky to arrange if the registers are currently
> in use by context switch logic running in the first task.
Yes.
> My current feeling is that we probably have to stick with
> preempt_disable() here, but hopefully we can get rid of
> local_bh_disable() (as proposed) with no ill effects...
>
> Does that sound sensible?
If you want to stick with may_use_simd() then yes.
> Cheers
> ---Dave
Sebastian
