On 01/13, Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> >> @@ -412,8 +412,14 @@ static inline void switch_fpu_prepare(struct
> >> task_struct *old, struct task_struc bool preload =
> >> tsk_used_math(new) && (use_eager_fpu() || new->thread.fpu_counter
> >> > 5); if (__thread_has_fpu(old)) { -               if 
> >> > (!__save_init_fpu(old)) 
> >> +          /* +             * Make sure the FPU state is restored from 
> >> memory next
> >> time, +             * if the task has an FPU exception pending, or the
> >> task's in +                 * memory FPU state could be changed by a 
> >> debugger. 
> >> +           */ +           if (!__save_init_fpu(old) ||
> >> task_is_stopped_or_traced(old)) cpu = ~0;
> >
> > Well, if debugger wants to change FPU state, it should call
> > init_fpu() which resets .last_cpu ?
>
> Does the ptrace (and utrace, and ... ) code actually do that?

Yes, see xfpregs_get/set. So I think this change is not needed (but I
didn't look at the next patches).

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to