i387: move TS_USEDFPU flag from thread_info to task_struct

i387: move TS_USEDFPU flag from thread_info to task_struct

This moves the bit that indicates whether a thread has ownership of the
FPU from the TS_USEDFPU bit in thread_info->status to a word of its own
(called 'has_fpu') in task_struct->thread.has_fpu.

This fixes two independent bugs at the same time:

 - changing 'thread_info->status' from the scheduler causes nasty
   problems for the other users of that variable, since it is defined to
   be thread-synchronous (that's what the "TS_" part of the naming was
   supposed to indicate).

   So perfectly valid code could (and did) do

	ti->status |= TS_RESTORE_SIGMASK;

   and the compiler was free to do that as separate load, or and store
   instructions.  Which can cause problems with preemption, since a task
   switch could happen in between, and change the TS_USEDFPU bit. The
   change to TS_USEDFPU would be overwritten by the final store.

   In practice, this seldom happened, though, because the 'status' field
   was seldom used more than once, so gcc would generally tend to
   generate code that used a read-modify-write instruction and thus
   happened to avoid this problem - RMW instructions are naturally low
   fat and preemption-safe.

 - On x86-32, the current_thread_info() pointer would, during interrupts
   and softirqs, point to a *copy* of the real thread_info, because
   x86-32 uses %esp to calculate the thread_info address, and thus the
   separate irq (and softirq) stacks would cause these kinds of odd
   thread_info copy aliases.

   This is normally not a problem, since interrupts aren't supposed to
   look at thread information anyway (what thread is running at
   interrupt time really isn't very well-defined), but it confused the
   heck out of irq_fpu_usable() and the code that tried to squirrel
   away the FPU state.

   (It also caused untold confusion for us poor kernel developers).

It also turns out that using 'task_struct' is actually much more natural
for most of the call sites that care about the FPU state, since they
tend to work with the task struct for other reasons anyway (ie
scheduling).  And the FPU data that we are going to save/restore is
found there too.

Thanks to Arjan Van De Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> for pointing us to
the %esp issue.

Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Reported-and-tested-by: Raphael Prevost <raphael@buro.asia>
Acked-and-tested-by: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Tested-by: Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>