On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 08:56:42AM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote: > >> > >> > >> Assume that we enlighten all non-atomics to grab the rcu read lock, such as > > > > These non-atomics are defined and used because they want to avoid atomic > > ops overhead? > > So I'm afraid using rcu read lock in these places would lead to unexpected > > overhead. > > It should be cheaper than atomics IIUC. Further, I assume that some pages > could > batch over multiple such operations (esp. page freeing path when we process > tail > pages).
Doubt we have the energy to bother with this much. We'll have to stick them in the bit manipulation macros if memory failure is configured and be done with it. -- MST
