From: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
stern@rowland.harvard.edu, 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,
corbet@lwn.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: cross-reference "tools/memory-model/"
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:00:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180209150053.GA24203@andrea> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180209142923.GB3617@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 06:29:23AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 01:50:51PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 04:31:00AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Sun, Feb 04, 2018 at 07:37:08PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > > > Hi Akira,
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 01:14:10AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> > > > > Hi Paul,
> > > > > CC: Andrea
> > > > >
> > > > > This is intentionally off the list, as I was not cc'd in the thread.
> > > > > If you think it is worthwhile, could you help me join the thread by
> > > > > forwarding the following part as a reply to your message, plus CC: to me.
> > > >
> > > > [CCing lists and other people]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 17:21:03AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 10:12:48AM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > > > > >> Recent efforts led to the specification of a memory consistency model
> > > > > >> for the Linux kernel [1], which "can (roughly speaking) be thought of
> > > > > >> as an automated version of memory-barriers.txt" and which is (in turn)
> > > > > >> "accompanied by extensive documentation on its use and its design".
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Make sure that the (occasional) reader of memory-barriers.txt will be
> > > > > >> aware of these developments.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> [1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=151687290114799&w=2
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am inclined to pull in something along these lines, but would like
> > > > > > some feedback on the wording, especially how "official" we want to
> > > > > > make the memory model to be.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > >
> > > > > The change log of commit e7720af5f9ac ("locking/Documentation: Add disclaimer") says:
> > > > >
> > > > > It appears people are reading this document as a requirements list for
> > > > > building hardware. This is not the intent of this document. Nor is it
> > > > > particularly suited for this purpose.
> > > > >
> > > > > The primary purpose of this document is our collective attempt to define
> > > > > a set of primitives that (hopefully) allow us to write correct code on
> > > > > the myriad of SMP platforms Linux supports.
> > > > >
> > > > > Its a definite work in progress as our understanding of these platforms,
> > > > > and memory ordering in general, progresses.
> > > > >
> > > > > Nor does being mentioned in this document mean we think its a
> > > > > particularly good idea; the data dependency barrier required by Alpha
> > > > > being a prime example. Yes we have it, no you're insane to require it
> > > > > when building new hardware.
> > > > >
> > > > > My take on the Linux Kernel memory-consistency model is a supplement of
> > > > > memory-barriers.txt and the disclaimer also applies to the memory model.
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If I don't hear otherwise in a couple of days, I will pull this as is.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanx, Paul
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> ---
> > > > > >> Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 4 +++-
> > > > > >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> > > > > >> index a863009849a3b..8cc3f098f4a7d 100644
> > > > > >> --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> > > > > >> +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> > > > > >> @@ -17,7 +17,9 @@ meant as a guide to using the various memory barriers provided by Linux, but
> > > > > >> in case of any doubt (and there are many) please ask.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> To repeat, this document is not a specification of what Linux expects from
> > > > > >> -hardware.
> > > > > >> +hardware. For such a specification, in the form of a memory consistency
> > > > > >> +model, and for documentation about its usage and its design, the reader is
> > > > > >> +referred to "tools/memory-model/".
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > Adding cross-reference in this way can _weaken_ the message of the disclaimer.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for your remarks; I do share the same concern.
> > > >
> > > > > What about adding it in the previous sentence as the patch appended bellow?
> > > >
> > > > I do like this idea: I believe that my phrasing (and that "what Linux
> > > > expects from hardware") may be easily subject to misinterpretation...
> > > > which your solution can avoid.
> > >
> > > Any objections to Akira's patch below? (Give or take the usual
> > > wordsmithing.)
> > >
> > > Andrea, should I interpret your paragraph above ask an Acked-by?
> >
> > Well, I am among the Signed-off-by: of the patch; it didn't seem too fair
> > to me to Ack my own patch... ;-) Is the wording sound? other suggestions?
>
> Good point, too many all-day meetings last week. ;-)
>
> How about the following?
Even better IMO,
Thanks!
Andrea
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> commit 9370f98c312d658afe88e548d469549d8f31e402
> Author: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri Feb 9 06:26:08 2018 -0800
>
> Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Cross-reference "tools/memory-model/"
>
> A memory consistency model is now available for the Linux kernel [1],
> which "can (roughly speaking) be thought of as an automated version of
> memory-barriers.txt" and which is (in turn) "accompanied by extensive
> documentation on its use and its design".
>
> Inform the (occasional) reader of memory-barriers.txt of these
> developments.
>
> [1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=151687290114799&w=2
>
> Co-developed-by: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
> Co-developed-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> index 479ecec80593..74ad222d11ed 100644
> --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> @@ -14,7 +14,11 @@ DISCLAIMER
> This document is not a specification; it is intentionally (for the sake of
> brevity) and unintentionally (due to being human) incomplete. This document is
> meant as a guide to using the various memory barriers provided by Linux, but
> -in case of any doubt (and there are many) please ask.
> +in case of any doubt (and there are many) please ask. Some doubts may be
> +resolved by referring to the formal memory consistency model and related
> +documentation at tools/memory-model/. Nevertheless, even this memory
> +model should be viewed as the collective opinion of its maintainers rather
> +than as an infallible oracle.
>
> To repeat, this document is not a specification of what Linux expects from
> hardware.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-09 15:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-02 9:12 [PATCH 1/2] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: cross-reference "tools/memory-model/" Andrea Parri
2018-02-03 1:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
[not found] ` <8b4db282-2705-ed96-cf23-b0cdf94bbac8@gmail.com>
2018-02-04 18:37 ` Andrea Parri
2018-02-09 12:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-09 12:50 ` Andrea Parri
2018-02-09 13:11 ` Akira Yokosawa
2018-02-09 14:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-09 14:53 ` Akira Yokosawa
2018-02-09 15:00 ` Andrea Parri [this message]
2018-02-10 0:55 ` 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=20180209150053.GA24203@andrea \
--to=parri.andrea@gmail.com \
--cc=akiyks@gmail.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luc.maranget@inria.fr \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
--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