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.
Could've been call_srcu() instead. Looking at the code that triggers the sp->running case and we slow down. That is !running will queue and insta-complete the callback, resulting in done=true and no waiting. > > I've not looked hard enough at the new SRCU to see if its possible to > re-instate that feature.
