On 2020-10-20 13:41:37 [+0200], Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Right, but this patch set doesn't include the lazy preemption stuff, and > given the 'fun' Valentin and me are still having with it, I'd like to > keep it like that. > > But yes, that might warrant a slightly less NOP implementation. Uh. Looking at the actual implementation we don't look at the mg-counter but have preempt_lazy_disable() for that. Let me sync your bits then. Thanks. Sebastian
