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=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,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 2E42FC433F5 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 07:22:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE4A820857 for ; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 07:22:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amarulasolutions.com header.i=@amarulasolutions.com header.b="n006WzUr" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DE4A820857 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=amarulasolutions.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 S1728006AbeIELux (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Sep 2018 07:50:53 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f68.google.com ([209.85.208.68]:43680 "EHLO mail-ed1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725865AbeIELux (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Sep 2018 07:50:53 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f68.google.com with SMTP id z27-v6so5226461edb.10 for ; Wed, 05 Sep 2018 00:22:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=amarulasolutions.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Z7jmwhqR0ToEBKz29jaeG83cs/76ebLJCxEE8TDqqLw=; b=n006WzUrF+P5G//xc8L3Gpl327WDloE/iDLJKgqxqdL4PFo1a2oIH5SKUWjn9ccOgH 3lTYX4KkFM1s6EH/J8zqP1PhwscPzkpGGzAF1IkWCjJo0BckjEelxwC2Rmom7coeG7WO QlyDt+W8zxBrrEKrB66ex/A5scCGRwaQieWgc= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Z7jmwhqR0ToEBKz29jaeG83cs/76ebLJCxEE8TDqqLw=; b=Wj76NoLVo1FWjeuGEjkWurbMAPcjx7OCYIZTVG+HNaH4c1YYqQwVef9aQNl4yWkdyv jfv+cDttiTQKzcxYzTe9zKSI1oEl66On2v82z0DZSAtinhAIcW0/x2/EtwkhD/aBt9oG HHKLhJxJqm1RiKew/tEQ1O8ntGbYns5XP1/8UDTd9iPRey55GzrCMdJZmfiEHfU3Ec9s tW6K294/y2naviPIUAFEQJfEQVveafI0IcNwYNRcNfazZo4V7WRUxQqzqBm1PgR62WDS w6GK9AnM68L84y+1o6/EePGtbplK98rCk5pkNGCgTRr+0vPSDHUHC8LREwjCKrpyZxPX N9oA== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51CGGZQnS65EWMcZFOO1Dm39HqaqjxUDihOxjQmOcMYqZFzS//Lw ffXCUK6JaaXZX2lRvhy7AM1gTw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdaFdEIw4p7CadJMT9kxFQFxdX1bfW43BwKnlLTmVsMdSRMDUFa2rKNS04D4gbwsvhULJlZYSQ== X-Received: by 2002:a50:8843:: with SMTP id c3-v6mr41369416edc.146.1536132122062; Wed, 05 Sep 2018 00:22:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from andrea (85.100.broadband17.iol.cz. [109.80.100.85]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w2-v6sm981668edw.83.2018.09.05.00.21.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 05 Sep 2018 00:22:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2018 09:21:51 +0200 From: Andrea Parri To: Alan Stern Cc: Will Deacon , "Paul E. McKenney" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, 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 Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC LKMM 1/7] tools/memory-model: Add extra ordering for locks and remove it for ordinary release/acquire Message-ID: <20180905072151.GA3185@andrea> References: <20180904081144.GA4137@andrea> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 04, 2018 at 03:09:49PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Tue, 4 Sep 2018, Andrea Parri wrote: > > Heh, your confusion might be the reflection of mine... ;-) That was > > indeed a long and not conclusive discussion (meaning there're pending > > issues); and I cannot claim to find "arguments" such as: > > > > "More than one kernel developer has expressed the opinion that > > the LKMM should enforce ordering of writes by locking." > > > > particularly helpful (I do tend to be convinced by arguments rather > > than by opinions). In fact, you can take the following as my only > > current "constructive argument" against the patch [1,2]: > > > > THE COMMIT MESSAGE IS RIDICULOUS; PLEASE EXPAND ON IT, AND DO > > SO BY LEVERAGING BOTH PROS AND CONS OF THE APPLIED CHANGES > > Do you have any concrete suggestions (i.e., some actual text) for > improvements to the patch description? Earlier in your message you > mentioned that Will's comment: > > LKMM offers stronger guarantees that can portably be relied upon > in the codebase. > > would make a good addition. Suitably edited, it could be added to the > description. I can think of a few other things myself, but I'd like to > hear your thoughts. Anything else? Yes: I do sometimes have the impression that your "rules" for trimming text in emails/replies are too aggressive... Andrea > > Alan >