From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5959C6778C for ; Thu, 5 Jul 2018 16:56:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D851240FE for ; Thu, 5 Jul 2018 16:56:48 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 5D851240FE Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.vnet.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754633AbeGEQ4p (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:56:45 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:39336 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754581AbeGEQ4j (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:56:39 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w65GtbqB007237 for ; Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:56:39 -0400 Received: from e16.ny.us.ibm.com (e16.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.206]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2k1pyy8pqe-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 05 Jul 2018 12:56:38 -0400 Received: from localhost by e16.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:56:38 -0400 Received: from b01cxnp22036.gho.pok.ibm.com (9.57.198.26) by e16.ny.us.ibm.com (146.89.104.203) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:56:33 -0400 Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.108]) by b01cxnp22036.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id w65GuWNm10027318 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 5 Jul 2018 16:56:33 GMT Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id C050BB2065; Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:56:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F7A8B205F; Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:56:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (unknown [9.85.138.104]) by b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:56:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C8D2D16CA477; Thu, 5 Jul 2018 09:58:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2018 09:58:48 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Andrea Parri Cc: Alan Stern , Will Deacon , LKMM Maintainers -- Akira Yokosawa , Boqun Feng , David Howells , Jade Alglave , Luc Maranget , Nicholas Piggin , Peter Zijlstra , Kernel development list , dlustig@nvidia.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tools/memory-model: Add write ordering by release-acquire and by locks Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20180704121103.GB26941@arm.com> <20180705153140.GO3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180705153906.GA2345@andrea> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180705153906.GA2345@andrea> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18070516-0072-0000-0000-0000037A87CC X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00009314; HX=3.00000241; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000266; SDB=6.01056984; UDB=6.00542258; IPR=6.00834904; MB=3.00022012; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2018-07-05 16:56:36 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18070516-0073-0000-0000-0000489A66A0 Message-Id: <20180705165848.GR3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-07-05_06:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=726 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1806210000 definitions=main-1807050191 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 05:39:06PM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote: > > > At any rate, it looks like instead of strengthening the relation, I > > > should write a patch that removes it entirely. I also will add new, > > > stronger relations for use with locking, essentially making spin_lock > > > and spin_unlock be RCsc. > > > > Only in the presence of smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() or > > smp_mb__after_spinlock(), correct? Or am I confused about RCsc? > > There are at least two definitions of RCsc: one as documented in the header > comment for smp_mb__after_spinlock() or rather in the patch under review..., > one as processor architects used to intend it. ;-) Searching isn't working for me all that well this morning, so could you please send me a pointer to that patch? Thanx, Paul