From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tools/memory-model] Add s390.{cfg,cat} Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 08:16:42 -0700 Message-ID: <20180403151642.GK3948@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20180402193154.GA3948@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Stern Cc: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, parri.andrea@gmail.com, will.deacon@arm.com, peterz@infradead.org, boqun.feng@gmail.com, npiggin@gmail.com, dhowells@redhat.com, j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk, luc.maranget@inria.fr, akiyks@gmail.com List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 09:50:19AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Mon, 2 Apr 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > I will look at this more later, reaching end of both battery and useful > > > > attention span... > > > > Like the following, perhaps? > > > > Thanx, Paul > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > s390 > > > > include "fences.cat" > > include "cos.cat" > > > > (* Fundamental coherence ordering *) > > let com = rf | co | fr > > acyclic po-loc | com as coherence > > > > (* Atomic *) > > empty rmw & (fre;coe) as atom > > > > (* Fences *) > > let mb = [M] ; fencerel(Mb) ; [M] > > > > (* TSO with multicopy atomicity *) > > let po-ghb = ([R] ; po ; [M]) | ([M] ; po ; [W]) > > acyclic mb | po-ghb | fr | rf | co as sc > > Yes, that should work okay (apart from issues related to ordering of > atomic accesses). > > By the way, what does that last "sc" stand for? Surely not Sequential > Consistency! You might consider renaming it to "tso-mca". Good point, fixed. But it is the closest to SC in commercial computing systems, for whatever that is worth. ;-) Thanx, Paul From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:39700 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751233AbeDCPPy (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:15:54 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w33FE2kN095199 for ; Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:15:54 -0400 Received: from e12.ny.us.ibm.com (e12.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.202]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2h4ahnx7cy-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA256 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 03 Apr 2018 11:15:51 -0400 Received: from localhost by e12.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:15:50 -0400 Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 08:16:42 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tools/memory-model] Add s390.{cfg,cat} Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20180402193154.GA3948@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20180403151642.GK3948@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Alan Stern Cc: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, parri.andrea@gmail.com, will.deacon@arm.com, peterz@infradead.org, boqun.feng@gmail.com, npiggin@gmail.com, dhowells@redhat.com, j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk, luc.maranget@inria.fr, akiyks@gmail.com Message-ID: <20180403151642.OsXZ5OaHQOPOm0C1-BlekMw_Wg770T-dnxNo1c2uVE0@z> On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 09:50:19AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Mon, 2 Apr 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > I will look at this more later, reaching end of both battery and useful > > > > attention span... > > > > Like the following, perhaps? > > > > Thanx, Paul > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > s390 > > > > include "fences.cat" > > include "cos.cat" > > > > (* Fundamental coherence ordering *) > > let com = rf | co | fr > > acyclic po-loc | com as coherence > > > > (* Atomic *) > > empty rmw & (fre;coe) as atom > > > > (* Fences *) > > let mb = [M] ; fencerel(Mb) ; [M] > > > > (* TSO with multicopy atomicity *) > > let po-ghb = ([R] ; po ; [M]) | ([M] ; po ; [W]) > > acyclic mb | po-ghb | fr | rf | co as sc > > Yes, that should work okay (apart from issues related to ordering of > atomic accesses). > > By the way, what does that last "sc" stand for? Surely not Sequential > Consistency! You might consider renaming it to "tso-mca". Good point, fixed. But it is the closest to SC in commercial computing systems, for whatever that is worth. ;-) Thanx, Paul