[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170419131553.cii62nl2si3lwm7w@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 15:15:53 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
jiangshanlai@...il.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, dvhart@...ux.intel.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, bobby.prani@...il.com,
marc.zyngier@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 0/13] Miscellaneous fixes for 4.12
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 06:02:45AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 01:28:45PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > So the thing Maz complained about is because KVM assumes
> > synchronize_srcu() is 'free' when there is no srcu_read_lock() activity.
> > This series 'breaks' that.
> >
> > I've not looked hard enough at the new SRCU to see if its possible to
> > re-instate that feature.
>
> And with the fix I gave Maz, the parallelized version is near enough
> to being free as well. It was just a stupid bug on my part: I forgot
> to check for expedited when scheduling callbacks.
Right, although for the old SRCU it was true for !expedited as well.
Just turns out the KVM memslots crud already uses
synchronize_srcu_expedited().
<rant>without a friggin' comment; hate @expedited</rant>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists