From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
mingo@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, nborisov@suse.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 10/12] tools/memory-model: Add a S lock-based external-view litmus test
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 09:53:21 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180221175320.GI3617@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1802211148390.2032-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 11:50:31AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Feb 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 10:09:00AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Tue, 20 Feb 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > >
> > > > From: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
> > > >
> > > > This commit adds a litmus test in which P0() and P1() form a lock-based S
> > > > litmus test, with the addition of P2(), which observes P0()'s and P1()'s
> > >
> > > Why do you call this an "S" litmus test? Isn't ISA2 a better
> > > description?
> >
> > Indeed, the name of the test is in fact ISA2.
>
> Sure; and the Changelog entry should reflect this.
No argument.
> > > > accesses with a full memory barrier but without the lock. This litmus
> > > > test asks whether writes carried out by two different processes under the
> > > > same lock will be seen in order by a third process not holding that lock.
> > > > The answer to this question is "yes" for all architectures supporting
> > > > the Linux kernel, but is "no" according to the current version of LKMM.
> > > >
> > > > A patch to LKMM is under development.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > .../ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+)
> > > > create mode 100644 tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus
> > >
> > > Aren't these tests supposed to be described in litmus-tests/README?
>
> You apparently missed this recommendation.
I did, please accept my apologies and please see below.
> > > > diff --git a/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus b/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index 000000000000..7a39a0aaa976
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
> > > > +C ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus
> > > > +
> > > > +(*
> > > > + * Result: Sometimes
> > > > + *
> > > > + * This test shows that the ordering provided by a lock-protected S
> > > > + * litmus test (P0() and P1()) are not visible to external process P2().
> > > > + * This is likely to change soon.
> > >
> > > That last line may be premature. We haven't reached any consensus on
> > > how RISC-V will handle this. If RISC-V allows the test then the memory
> > > model can't forbid it.
> >
> > Agreed. How about this? If the RISC-V question is answered by the
> > end of next week, I update accordingly. If not, I update the comment
> > to give the details.
>
> The README also should be updated.
Agreed.
> > Hey, at least having the memory model go in at about the same time as
> > a new architecture is giving us good practice! ;-)
>
> Hopefully things will settle down in a week or two.
Here is hoping!
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
commit e6658d1d7fcc6391f3d00beaadc484243123a893
Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed Feb 21 09:49:01 2018 -0800
tools/memory-order: Add documentation of new litmus test
The litmus-tests/README file lacked any mention of then litmus test
named ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus. This commit therefore
adds this test.
Reported-by: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
diff --git a/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/README b/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/README
index dca7d823ad57..aff3eb90e067 100644
--- a/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/README
+++ b/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/README
@@ -32,6 +32,11 @@ IRIW+poonceonces+OnceOnce.litmus
order of a pair of writes, where each write is to a different
variable by a different process?
+ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus
+ Tests whether the ordering provided by a lock-protected S litmus
+ test is visible to an external process whose accesses are
+ separated by smp_mb().
+
ISA2+poonceonces.litmus
As below, but with store-release replaced with WRITE_ONCE()
and load-acquire replaced with READ_ONCE().
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-21 17:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-20 23:24 [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 0/12] Miscellaneous fixes Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-20 23:25 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 01/12] tools/memory-model: Clarify the origin/scope of the tool name Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 10:39 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Andrea Parri
2018-02-20 23:25 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 02/12] MAINTAINERS: Add the Memory Consistency Model subsystem Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 10:39 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Andrea Parri
2018-02-20 23:25 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 03/12] MAINTAINERS: List file memory-barriers.txt within the LKMM entry Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 10:40 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Andrea Parri
2018-02-20 23:25 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 04/12] EXP litmus_tests: Add comments explaining tests' purposes Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 10:40 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-20 23:25 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 05/12] README: Fix a couple of punctuation errors Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 10:41 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-20 23:25 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 06/12] MAINTAINERS: Add Akira Yokosawa as an LKMM reviewer Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 10:41 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-20 23:25 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 07/12] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: Cross-reference "tools/memory-model/" Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 10:42 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Andrea Parri
2018-02-20 23:25 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 08/12] memory-barriers: Fix description of data dependency barriers Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 10:42 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Nikolay Borisov
2018-02-20 23:25 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 09/12] tools/memory-model: Add required herd7 version to README file Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 10:43 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 15:10 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 09/12] " Alan Stern
2018-02-21 16:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 16:51 ` Alan Stern
2018-02-20 23:25 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 10/12] tools/memory-model: Add a S lock-based external-view litmus test Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 10:43 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Alan Stern
2018-02-21 15:09 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 10/12] " Alan Stern
2018-02-21 16:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 16:50 ` Alan Stern
2018-02-21 17:53 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2018-02-21 18:38 ` Alan Stern
2018-02-21 19:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 19:27 ` Alan Stern
2018-02-21 22:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-22 3:23 ` Boqun Feng
2018-02-22 4:13 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-22 5:27 ` Boqun Feng
2018-02-22 5:42 ` Daniel Lustig
2018-02-22 6:58 ` Boqun Feng
2018-02-22 10:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-22 10:45 ` Boqun Feng
2018-02-22 11:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-22 10:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-22 10:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-20 23:25 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 11/12] tools/memory-model: Convert underscores to hyphens Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 10:44 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-20 23:25 ` [PATCH RFC tools/lkmm 12/12] tools/memory-model: Remove rb-dep, smp_read_barrier_depends, and lockless_dereference Paul E. McKenney
2018-02-21 10:45 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Alan Stern
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=20180221175320.GI3617@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akiyks@gmail.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luc.maranget@inria.fr \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=nborisov@suse.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=parri.andrea@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).