From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S934402AbbDVPVc (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 22 Apr 2015 11:21:32 -0400
Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:52156 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S933943AbbDVPVa (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 22 Apr 2015 11:21:30 -0400
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 17:21:21 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
        dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, riel@redhat.com, sbsiddha@gmail.com,
        luto@amacapital.net, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com,
        fenghua.yu@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/16] x86, fpu: wrap get_xsave_addr() to make it safer
Message-ID: <20150422152121.GI6897@pd.tnic>
References: <20150401004623.894DF37A@viggo.jf.intel.com>
 <20150401004624.49096AD0@viggo.jf.intel.com>
 <20150422104047.GA6897@pd.tnic>
 <20150422131618.GA16785@redhat.com>
 <20150422133146.GE6897@pd.tnic>
 <5537B6AD.6070507@sr71.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.11.1504221715410.13914@nanos>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1504221715410.13914@nanos>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 05:17:08PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Is there a reason to have the task argument at all if thats only
> intended for current?

Right, so I think we either use @tsk everywhere or disable preemption in
the whole function if using current. But I think we want to use @tsk...

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--