Re: [PATCH] mm/mmu_notifier: Remove non_block_start/end() from notifier invocation

"Paul E. McKenney" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.linux-rt-devel,org.kernel.vger.kvm,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kvack.linux-mm
Message-ID <49df45c6-4d0e-483a-8acc-0ace7f9a6484@paulmck-laptop>
On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 08:54:44AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2026-08-12 at 14:38 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > If not, please let me know, and I will put together that does the
> > job.
> 
> If you're working on that, I assume it'd need the readers to be known-
> atomic. So if any of the read-side SRCU_READ_FLAVOR_ATOMIC thing I
> already threw together is useful, you can find it in my tree at
> https://git.infradead.org/?p=users/dwmw2/linux.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/srcu-atomic

Thank you, happy to steal pieces of that with attribution.  ;-)

My current plan says that if you have an atomic SRCU on which you
use srcu_read_lock_atomic() and srcu_read_unlock_atomic(), you only
ever get to use synchronize_srcu_atomic(), never synchronize_srcu(),
synchronize_srcu_expedited(), or call_srcu().  Does that work for you?

> Slightly orthogonally, what do you think of making
> synchronize_srcu{_expedited,}() attempt try_synchronize_srcu() first
> for an early return?

No objections, but one thing at a time.

							Thanx, Paul
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.