x86/fpu: Optimize copy_fpregs_to_fpstate() by removing the FNCLEX synchronization with FP exceptions

So we have the following ancient code in copy_fpregs_to_fpstate():

	if (unlikely(fpu->state->fxsave.swd & X87_FSW_ES)) {
		asm volatile("fnclex");
		goto drop_fpregs;
	}

which clears pending FPU exceptions and then drops registers, which
causes the next FP instruction of the saved context to re-load the
saved FPU state, with all pending exceptions marked properly, and
will re-start the exception handling mechanism in the hardware.

Since FPU exceptions are always issued on instruction boundaries,
in particular on the next FP instruction following the exception
generating instruction, there's no fear of getting an FP exception
asynchronously.

They were truly asynchronous back in the IRQ13 days, when the FPU was
a weird and expensive co-processor that did its own processing, and we
had to synchronize with them, but that code is not working anymore:
we don't have IRQ13 mapped in the IDT anymore.

With the introduction of optimized XSAVE support there's a new
complication: if the xstate features bit indicates that a particular
state component is unused (in 'init state'), then the hardware does
not guarantee that the XSAVE (et al) instruction keeps the underlying
FPU state image in memory valid and current. In practice this means
that the hardware won't write it, and the exceptions flag in the
state might be an older version, with it still being set. This
meant that we had to check the xfeatures flag as well, adding
another memory load and branch to a critical hot path of the scheduler.

So optimize all this by removing both the old quirk and the new check,
and straight-line optimizing the most common cases with likely()
hints. Quite a bit of code gets removed this way:

  arch/x86/kernel/process_64.o:

    text    data     bss     dec     filename
    5484       8       0    5492     process_64.o.before
    5416       8       0    5424     process_64.o.after

Now there's also a chance that some weird behavior or erratum was
masked by our IRQ13 handling quirk (or that I misunderstood the
nature of the quirk), and that this change triggers some badness.

There's no real good way to protect against that possibility other
than keeping this change well isolated, well commented and well
bisectable. If you bisect a weird (or not so weird) breakage to
this commit then please let us know!
Reviewed-by: NBorislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
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: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>