From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joel Fernandes Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] LKMM: Add litmus test for RCU GP guarantee where reader stores Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 21:31:00 -0400 Message-ID: <20200323013100.GA207949@google.com> References: <20200320165948.GB155212@google.com> <20200320214432.GB129293@google.com> <20200321020501.GF105953@debian-boqun.qqnc3lrjykvubdpftowmye0fmh.lx.internal.cloudapp.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200321020501.GF105953@debian-boqun.qqnc3lrjykvubdpftowmye0fmh.lx.internal.cloudapp.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Boqun Feng Cc: Alan Stern , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Akira Yokosawa , Andrea Parri , Daniel Lustig , David Howells , Jade Alglave , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Luc Maranget , Nicholas Piggin , "Paul E. McKenney" , Peter Zijlstra , Will Deacon List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 10:05:01AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 05:44:32PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 04:56:59PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > > On Fri, 20 Mar 2020, Joel Fernandes wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 11:03:30AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 20 Mar 2020, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > This adds an example for the important RCU grace period guarantee, which > > > > > > shows an RCU reader can never span a grace period. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) > > > > > > --- > > > > > > .../litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus | 37 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) > > > > > > create mode 100644 tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus b/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus > > > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > > > index 0000000000000..73557772e2a32 > > > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > > > +++ b/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus > > > > > > > > > > Do these new tests really belong here? I thought we were adding a new > > > > > directory under Documentation/ for litmus tests that illustrate parts > > > > > of the LKMM or memory-barriers.txt. > > > > > > > > > > By contrast, the tests under tools/memory-model are merely to show > > > > > people what litmus tests look like and how they should be written. > > > > > > > > I could add it to tools/memory-model/Documentation/ under a new > > > > 'examples' directory there. We could also create an 'rcu' directory in > > > > tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/ and add these there. Thoughts? > > > > > > What happened was that about a month ago, Boqun Feng added > > > Documentation/atomic-tests for litmus tests related to handling of > > > atomic_t types (see > > > .) Should we > > > interpose an extra directory level, making it > > > Documentation/litmus-tests/atomic? Or > > > Documentation/LKMM-litmus-tests/atomic? > > > > > > Then the new tests added here could go into > > > Documentation/litmus-tests/rcu, or whatever. > > > > That's fine with me. Unless anyone objects, I will add to > > Documentation/litmus-tests/rcu and resend. > > > > Seems good to me, I will resend my patchset with the new directory. And > I assume in your patchset you will include the MAINTAINERS part for > adding Documentation/litmus-tests/ as a diretory watched by LKMM group? > In that case, I won't need to add any change to MAINTAINERS file in mine > and we won't have any conflict. ;-) Yes, will add to MAINTAINERS so that you don't have to :) About to send my queue now. thanks, - Joel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk1-f196.google.com ([209.85.222.196]:36844 "EHLO mail-qk1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726974AbgCWBbC (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Mar 2020 21:31:02 -0400 Received: by mail-qk1-f196.google.com with SMTP id d11so13763919qko.3 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 18:31:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 21:31:00 -0400 From: Joel Fernandes Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] LKMM: Add litmus test for RCU GP guarantee where reader stores Message-ID: <20200323013100.GA207949@google.com> References: <20200320165948.GB155212@google.com> <20200320214432.GB129293@google.com> <20200321020501.GF105953@debian-boqun.qqnc3lrjykvubdpftowmye0fmh.lx.internal.cloudapp.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200321020501.GF105953@debian-boqun.qqnc3lrjykvubdpftowmye0fmh.lx.internal.cloudapp.net> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Boqun Feng Cc: Alan Stern , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Akira Yokosawa , Andrea Parri , Daniel Lustig , David Howells , Jade Alglave , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Luc Maranget , Nicholas Piggin , "Paul E. McKenney" , Peter Zijlstra , Will Deacon Message-ID: <20200323013100.WpJ-RUjWaTl1EM9a67XHoupQ1MwXjhFvOiKByFyCRH8@z> On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 10:05:01AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 05:44:32PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 04:56:59PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > > On Fri, 20 Mar 2020, Joel Fernandes wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 11:03:30AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 20 Mar 2020, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > This adds an example for the important RCU grace period guarantee, which > > > > > > shows an RCU reader can never span a grace period. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) > > > > > > --- > > > > > > .../litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus | 37 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) > > > > > > create mode 100644 tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus b/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus > > > > > > new file mode 100644 > > > > > > index 0000000000000..73557772e2a32 > > > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > > > +++ b/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus > > > > > > > > > > Do these new tests really belong here? I thought we were adding a new > > > > > directory under Documentation/ for litmus tests that illustrate parts > > > > > of the LKMM or memory-barriers.txt. > > > > > > > > > > By contrast, the tests under tools/memory-model are merely to show > > > > > people what litmus tests look like and how they should be written. > > > > > > > > I could add it to tools/memory-model/Documentation/ under a new > > > > 'examples' directory there. We could also create an 'rcu' directory in > > > > tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/ and add these there. Thoughts? > > > > > > What happened was that about a month ago, Boqun Feng added > > > Documentation/atomic-tests for litmus tests related to handling of > > > atomic_t types (see > > > .) Should we > > > interpose an extra directory level, making it > > > Documentation/litmus-tests/atomic? Or > > > Documentation/LKMM-litmus-tests/atomic? > > > > > > Then the new tests added here could go into > > > Documentation/litmus-tests/rcu, or whatever. > > > > That's fine with me. Unless anyone objects, I will add to > > Documentation/litmus-tests/rcu and resend. > > > > Seems good to me, I will resend my patchset with the new directory. And > I assume in your patchset you will include the MAINTAINERS part for > adding Documentation/litmus-tests/ as a diretory watched by LKMM group? > In that case, I won't need to add any change to MAINTAINERS file in mine > and we won't have any conflict. ;-) Yes, will add to MAINTAINERS so that you don't have to :) About to send my queue now. thanks, - Joel