mirror of
https://github.com/torvalds/linux.git
synced 2024-12-19 17:41:29 +00:00
x86/fpu: Don't export __kernel_fpu_{begin,end}()
There is one user of __kernel_fpu_begin() and before invoking it,
it invokes preempt_disable(). So it could invoke kernel_fpu_begin()
right away. The 32bit version of arch_efi_call_virt_setup() and
arch_efi_call_virt_teardown() does this already.
The comment above *kernel_fpu*() claims that before invoking
__kernel_fpu_begin() preemption should be disabled and that KVM is a
good example of doing it. Well, KVM doesn't do that since commit
f775b13eed
("x86,kvm: move qemu/guest FPU switching out to vcpu_run")
so it is not an example anymore.
With EFI gone as the last user of __kernel_fpu_{begin|end}(), both can
be made static and not exported anymore.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Nicolai Stange <nstange@suse.de>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: kvm ML <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: x86-ml <x86@kernel.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181129150210.2k4mawt37ow6c2vq@linutronix.de
This commit is contained in:
parent
2f2fcc40a9
commit
12209993e9
@ -82,8 +82,7 @@ struct efi_scratch {
|
||||
#define arch_efi_call_virt_setup() \
|
||||
({ \
|
||||
efi_sync_low_kernel_mappings(); \
|
||||
preempt_disable(); \
|
||||
__kernel_fpu_begin(); \
|
||||
kernel_fpu_begin(); \
|
||||
firmware_restrict_branch_speculation_start(); \
|
||||
\
|
||||
if (!efi_enabled(EFI_OLD_MEMMAP)) \
|
||||
@ -99,8 +98,7 @@ struct efi_scratch {
|
||||
efi_switch_mm(efi_scratch.prev_mm); \
|
||||
\
|
||||
firmware_restrict_branch_speculation_end(); \
|
||||
__kernel_fpu_end(); \
|
||||
preempt_enable(); \
|
||||
kernel_fpu_end(); \
|
||||
})
|
||||
|
||||
extern void __iomem *__init efi_ioremap(unsigned long addr, unsigned long size,
|
||||
|
@ -12,17 +12,12 @@
|
||||
#define _ASM_X86_FPU_API_H
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Careful: __kernel_fpu_begin/end() must be called with preempt disabled
|
||||
* and they don't touch the preempt state on their own.
|
||||
* If you enable preemption after __kernel_fpu_begin(), preempt notifier
|
||||
* should call the __kernel_fpu_end() to prevent the kernel/user FPU
|
||||
* state from getting corrupted. KVM for example uses this model.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* All other cases use kernel_fpu_begin/end() which disable preemption
|
||||
* during kernel FPU usage.
|
||||
* Use kernel_fpu_begin/end() if you intend to use FPU in kernel context. It
|
||||
* disables preemption so be careful if you intend to use it for long periods
|
||||
* of time.
|
||||
* If you intend to use the FPU in softirq you need to check first with
|
||||
* irq_fpu_usable() if it is possible.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
extern void __kernel_fpu_begin(void);
|
||||
extern void __kernel_fpu_end(void);
|
||||
extern void kernel_fpu_begin(void);
|
||||
extern void kernel_fpu_end(void);
|
||||
extern bool irq_fpu_usable(void);
|
||||
|
@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ bool irq_fpu_usable(void)
|
||||
}
|
||||
EXPORT_SYMBOL(irq_fpu_usable);
|
||||
|
||||
void __kernel_fpu_begin(void)
|
||||
static void __kernel_fpu_begin(void)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct fpu *fpu = ¤t->thread.fpu;
|
||||
|
||||
@ -111,9 +111,8 @@ void __kernel_fpu_begin(void)
|
||||
__cpu_invalidate_fpregs_state();
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
EXPORT_SYMBOL(__kernel_fpu_begin);
|
||||
|
||||
void __kernel_fpu_end(void)
|
||||
static void __kernel_fpu_end(void)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct fpu *fpu = ¤t->thread.fpu;
|
||||
|
||||
@ -122,7 +121,6 @@ void __kernel_fpu_end(void)
|
||||
|
||||
kernel_fpu_enable();
|
||||
}
|
||||
EXPORT_SYMBOL(__kernel_fpu_end);
|
||||
|
||||
void kernel_fpu_begin(void)
|
||||
{
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user