Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.11 v2] x86/EFI: further correct FPU state handling around runtime calls

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 25.06.18 at 14:24, <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: 25 June 2018 13:18
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/i387.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/i387.c
>> @@ -206,11 +206,11 @@ static inline void fpu_fxsave(struct vcp
>>  /*       VCPU FPU Functions    */
>>  /*******************************/
>>  /* Restore FPU state whenever VCPU is schduled in. */
>> -void vcpu_restore_fpu_eager(struct vcpu *v)
>> +void vcpu_restore_fpu_nonlazy(struct vcpu *v, bool need_stts)
>>  {
>>      /* Restore nonlazy extended state (i.e. parts not tracked by CR0.TS). */
>>      if ( !v->arch.fully_eager_fpu && !v->arch.nonlazy_xstate_used )
>> -        return;
>> +        goto maybe_stts;
> 
> It's really just an 'out' label (AFAICT, since need_stts needs to be true 
> for there to be any other semantic) so how about just calling it that rather 
> than 'maybe_stts'?

To be honest, I like "out" less, as being too generic a name. Nor am I
convinced that, going forward (and leaving aside the fact that we may
decide to drop lazy mode altogether), all code paths need to reach there.

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel