From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"c++std-parallel@accu.org" <c++std-parallel@accu.org>,
"linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
"gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>,
p796231 <Peter.Sewell@cl.cam.ac.uk>,
"mark.batty@cl.cam.ac.uk" <Mark.Batty@cl.cam.ac.uk>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@arm.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"michaelw@ca.ibm.com" <michaelw@ca.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Compilers and RCU readers: Once more unto the breach!
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 08:43:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150522064344.GA17518@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFxse3wTkfLMdotb+FO+_6EN32sseC0gpBaSnJ2KmbNUhQ@mail.gmail.com>
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> (a) the "official" rules are completely pointless, and make sense
> only because the standard is written for some random "abstract
> machine" that doesn't actually exist.
Presuming the intent of the abstract machine specification is to avoid
being seen as biased towards any specific machine (politics), maybe
write this as:
(a) the "official" rules are written for a somewhat weird and
complex "union of all known and theoretically possible CPU
architectures that exist or which might exist in the future",
which machine does not actually exist in practice, but which
allows a single abstract set of rules to apply to all machines.
These rules are complex, but if applied to a specific machine
they become considerably simpler. Here's a few examples: ...
?
(Assuming it's a goal of this standard to be human parseable to more
than a few dozen people on the planet.)
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-22 6:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-20 0:55 Compilers and RCU readers: Once more unto the breach! Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 1:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-05-20 2:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-05-20 2:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 11:47 ` Will Deacon
2015-05-20 12:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 15:46 ` Will Deacon
2015-05-20 15:54 ` Andrew Haley
2015-05-20 18:16 ` [c++std-parallel-1632] " Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-21 14:22 ` Michael Matz
2015-05-21 15:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-21 16:17 ` Michael Matz
2015-05-21 18:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 18:16 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-21 19:24 ` Will Deacon
2015-05-21 20:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-21 20:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2015-05-21 22:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-22 6:43 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2015-05-22 10:43 ` Richard Kenner
2015-05-22 13:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-22 13:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-26 17:37 ` [c++std-parallel-1641] " Torvald Riegel
2015-05-22 17:30 ` Will Deacon
2015-05-22 18:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 13:18 ` David Howells
2015-05-20 13:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 13:37 ` David Howells
2015-05-20 13:44 ` Ramana Radhakrishnan
2015-05-20 14:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 14:15 ` Ramana Radhakrishnan
2015-05-20 15:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 15:46 ` David Howells
2015-05-20 14:02 ` [c++std-parallel-1624] " Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 2:34 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 7:34 ` [c++std-parallel-1614] " Jens Maurer
2015-05-20 9:03 ` Richard Biener
2015-05-20 12:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-20 12:01 ` [c++std-parallel-1616] " Paul E. McKenney
2015-05-26 17:08 ` [c++std-parallel-1611] " Torvald Riegel
2015-05-27 1:41 ` [c++std-parallel-1651] " Paul E. McKenney
2015-07-14 0:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-09-22 17:00 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <CAPUmR1aqV_cQWjE8qC9x2sfmW-1ocKKMtCgNbjZH0cJ-AO2WTg@mail.gmail.com>
2015-09-23 23:26 ` [c++std-parallel-2008] " Paul E. McKenney
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=20150522064344.GA17518@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=Mark.Batty@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=Peter.Sewell@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=Ramana.Radhakrishnan@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=c++std-parallel@accu.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michaelw@ca.ibm.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/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).