Re: [tip:x86/asm] sched/x86_64: Don't save flags on context switch
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [tip:x86/asm] sched/x86_64: Don't save flags on context switch
- From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2014 22:58:37 +0100
- Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Sebastian Lackner <sebastian@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Chuck Ebbert <cebbert.lkml@xxxxxxxxx>, Anish Bhatt <anish@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-tip-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-tip-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <20141103214712.GA8711@redhat.com>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On 11/03, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 11/03, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >
> > And do we ever have TF set during a context switch? I hope not.
>
> I too hope.
>
> > Also, what's with 'jmp exit_intr' at the end of retint_kernel? Why
> > isn't that 'jmp retint_kernel'?
>
> Even better, why not "jmp retint_restore_args" ?
>
> preempt_schedule_irq() checks need_resched() and returns with irqs
> disabled, not need to to recheck test_preempt_need_resched() ?
Btw, why retint_kernel() checks "interrupts on" ? It seems to me that
that "interrupts off" is not possible, no? And this will be more clear
when we remove the "exit_intr" label.
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Stable Commits]
[Linux Stable Kernel]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux USB Devel]
[Linux Video &Media]
[Linux Audio Users]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]