Messages in this thread | | | From | "Tian, Kevin" <> | Subject | RE: [patch 5/6] x86/fpu: Provide fpu_update_guest_xcr0/xfd() | Date | Fri, 17 Dec 2021 15:33:34 +0000 |
| |
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2021 10:13 PM > > > > Yes, this is the 3rd open that I asked in another reply. The only restriction > > with this approach is that the sync cost is added also for legacy OS which > > doesn't touch xfd at all. > > You still can make that conditional on the guest XCR0. If guest never > enables the extended bit then neither the #NM trap nor the XFD sync > are required. > > But yes, there are too many moving parts here :) >
Yes. Many moving parts but in general it's getting cleaner and simplified. 😊
We just sent out v2 to hopefully lock down already-closed opens. Based on that we can see what remains to be further solved.
And really appreciate all the suggestions from you and Paolo!
Thanks Kevin
| |