So, picking up this thread which got dropped on the floor... On 02/01/2014 11:19 PM, Suresh Siddha wrote: > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/i387.c b/arch/x86/kernel/i387.c > index e8368c6..4e5f770 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/i387.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/i387.c > @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ > * General FPU state handling cleanups > * Gareth Hughes <gareth@xxxxxxxxxxx>, May 2000 > */ > +#include <linux/bootmem.h> > #include <linux/module.h> > #include <linux/regset.h> > #include <linux/sched.h> > @@ -186,6 +187,10 @@ void fpu_init(void) > if (xstate_size == 0) > init_thread_xstate(); > > + if (!current->thread.fpu.state) > + current->thread.fpu.state = > + alloc_bootmem_align(xstate_size, __alignof__(struct xsave_struct)); > + > mxcsr_feature_mask_init(); > xsave_init(); > eager_fpu_init(); So this bit is giving me a bit of a headache, specifically alloc_bootmem_align() is an __init function and fpu_init() obviously isn't. I am doubly confused because init_thread_xstate() only sets the xstate without any XSAVE features, so the memory allocation we get there will be insufficient later -- in fact, only a few lines further down the function, when xsave_init() is called. I'm wondering if we could put this somewhere inside xstate_enable_boot_cpu() instead, maybe? I'm assuming the reason you didn't want to in eager_fpu_init_bp() anymore is because you want the allocation to happen regardless of if eagerfpu is enabled, correct? -hpa -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html