4.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Andy Lutomirski luto@kernel.org
commit 58122bf1d856a4ea9581d62a07c557d997d46a19 upstream.
We have eager and lazy FPU modes, introduced in:
304bceda6a18 ("x86, fpu: use non-lazy fpu restore for processors supporting xsave")
The result is rather messy. There are two code paths in almost all of the FPU code, and only one of them (the eager case) is tested frequently, since most kernel developers have new enough hardware that we use eagerfpu.
It seems that, on any remotely recent hardware, eagerfpu is a win: glibc uses SSE2, so laziness is probably overoptimistic, and, in any case, manipulating TS is far slower that saving and restoring the full state. (Stores to CR0.TS are serializing and are poorly optimized.)
To try to shake out any latent issues on old hardware, this changes the default to eager on all CPUs. If no performance or functionality problems show up, a subsequent patch could remove lazy mode entirely.
Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski luto@kernel.org Cc: Andy Lutomirski luto@amacapital.net Cc: Borislav Petkov bp@alien8.de Cc: Dave Hansen dave.hansen@linux.intel.com Cc: Fenghua Yu fenghua.yu@intel.com Cc: H. Peter Anvin hpa@zytor.com Cc: Linus Torvalds torvalds@linux-foundation.org Cc: Oleg Nesterov oleg@redhat.com Cc: Peter Zijlstra peterz@infradead.org Cc: Quentin Casasnovas quentin.casasnovas@oracle.com Cc: Rik van Riel riel@redhat.com Cc: Sai Praneeth Prakhya sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com Cc: Thomas Gleixner tglx@linutronix.de Cc: yu-cheng yu yu-cheng.yu@intel.com Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/ac290de61bf08d9cfc2664a4f5080257ffc1075a.1453675014... Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar mingo@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
--- arch/x86/kernel/fpu/init.c | 13 +++++-------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/init.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/fpu/init.c @@ -252,7 +252,10 @@ static void __init fpu__init_system_xsta * not only saved the restores along the way, but we also have the * FPU ready to be used for the original task. * - * 'eager' switching is used on modern CPUs, there we switch the FPU + * 'lazy' is deprecated because it's almost never a performance win + * and it's much more complicated than 'eager'. + * + * 'eager' switching is by default on all CPUs, there we switch the FPU * state during every context switch, regardless of whether the task * has used FPU instructions in that time slice or not. This is done * because modern FPU context saving instructions are able to optimize @@ -263,7 +266,7 @@ static void __init fpu__init_system_xsta * to use 'eager' restores, if we detect that a task is using the FPU * frequently. See the fpu->counter logic in fpu/internal.h for that. ] */ -static enum { AUTO, ENABLE, DISABLE } eagerfpu = AUTO; +static enum { ENABLE, DISABLE } eagerfpu = ENABLE;
/* * Find supported xfeatures based on cpu features and command-line input. @@ -340,15 +343,9 @@ static void __init fpu__init_system_ctx_ */ static void __init fpu__init_parse_early_param(void) { - /* - * No need to check "eagerfpu=auto" again, since it is the - * initial default. - */ if (cmdline_find_option_bool(boot_command_line, "eagerfpu=off")) { eagerfpu = DISABLE; fpu__clear_eager_fpu_features(); - } else if (cmdline_find_option_bool(boot_command_line, "eagerfpu=on")) { - eagerfpu = ENABLE; }
if (cmdline_find_option_bool(boot_command_line, "no387"))