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.
Thanx, Paul
