linux-arch.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: will@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, boqun.feng@gmail.com,
	npiggin@gmail.com, dhowells@redhat.com, j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk,
	luc.maranget@inria.fr, paulmck@kernel.org, akiyks@gmail.com,
	dlustig@nvidia.com, joel@joelfernandes.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	hernan.poncedeleon@huaweicloud.com,
	jonas.oberhauser@huaweicloud.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tools/memory-model: Document herd7 (abstract) representation
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 18:52:18 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZmCXwjX/Rx7zKWpj@andrea> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <037bc316-3e8c-4748-bade-ffdad4239646@rowland.harvard.edu>

> I wonder if we really need a special notation for lk-rmw.  Is anything 
> wrong with using the normal rmw notation for these links?

I don't think we need the special notation: in fact, herd7 doesn't know
anything about these lk-rmw or rmw links between lock events until after
tools/memory-model/ (the .cat file) has established such links cf.

  (* Link Lock-Reads to their RMW-partner Lock-Writes *)
  let lk-rmw = ([LKR] ; po-loc ; [LKW]) \ (po ; po)
  let rmw = rmw | lk-rmw

I was trying to be informative (since that says "lk-rmw is a subrelation
of rmw) but, in order to be faithful to the scope of this document (herd
representation), the doc should really just indicate LKR ->po LKW.

Thoughts?

  Andrea

  reply	other threads:[~2024-06-05 16:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-06-05 13:49 [PATCH v2] tools/memory-model: Document herd7 (abstract) representation Andrea Parri
2024-06-05 15:53 ` Alan Stern
2024-06-05 16:52   ` Andrea Parri [this message]
2024-06-05 17:55     ` Alan Stern
2024-06-05 19:48       ` Andrea Parri

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=ZmCXwjX/Rx7zKWpj@andrea \
    --to=parri.andrea@gmail.com \
    --cc=akiyks@gmail.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=dlustig@nvidia.com \
    --cc=hernan.poncedeleon@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=jonas.oberhauser@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luc.maranget@inria.fr \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).