On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 12:38:35PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 09:27:34 -0700 > "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Two, I'm still grasping at the concept of srcu_fast (and srcu_lite for > > > that matter), where I rather be slow and safe than optimize and be > > > unsafe. The code where this is used may be faulting in user space > > > memory, so it doesn't need the micro-optimizations now. > > > > Straight-up SRCU and guard(srcu), then? Both are already in mainline. > > > > Or are those read-side smp_mb() calls a no-go for this code? > > As I stated, the read-side is likely going to be faulting in user space > memory. I don't think one or two smp_mb() will really make much of a > difference ;-) > > It's not urgent. If it can be switched to srcu_fast, we can do it later. Very good, we will continue with our removal of SRCU-lite, and I might as well add guard(srcu_fast) in my current series. Thanx, Paul
