From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Paul E . McKenney " <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Dan Lustig <dlustig@nvidia.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>,
Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
palmer@dabbelt.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Subject: [RFC v2 0/3] memory model: Make unlock(A)+lock(B) on the same CPU RCtso
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 22:54:13 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211025145416.698183-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com> (raw)
Hi,
Just a new version trying to make forward progress on this ;-)
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210930130823.2103688-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com/
Changes since v1:
* Split the patch into three to help resolve the litmus test
addition discussion.
* Add some explanation in patch #2 on the requirement of tests in
litmus-tests directory.
To summarize the change in memory model, we now guarantee in the
following code:
<memory access M>
spin_unlock(A);
spin_lock(B);
<memory access N>
M is ordered against N unless M is a store and N is a load. More
detailed examples of this guarantee can be found in patch #3.
Architecture maintainers, appreciate it that you can take a look at
patch #3 and rest of whole set to confirm this guarantee works on your
architectures.
Alan, I split the patchset into three patches because I do think we need
some sort of patch #2 so that we can have consensus about whether merge
patch #3 or not. I know you want to keep litmus-tests directory as
simple as possible, but it won't hurt to document the requirement.
Looking forwards to your thoughts ;-)
Suggestion and comments are welcome!
Regards,
Boqun
Boqun Feng (3):
tools/memory-model: Provide extra ordering for unlock+lock pair on the
same CPU
tools/memory-model: doc: Describe the requirement of the litmus-tests
directory
tools/memory-model: litmus: Add two tests for unlock(A)+lock(B)
ordering
.../Documentation/explanation.txt | 44 +++++++++++--------
tools/memory-model/README | 12 +++++
tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat | 6 +--
...LB+unlocklockonceonce+poacquireonce.litmus | 33 ++++++++++++++
...unlocklockonceonce+fencermbonceonce.litmus | 33 ++++++++++++++
tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/README | 8 ++++
6 files changed, 114 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/LB+unlocklockonceonce+poacquireonce.litmus
create mode 100644 tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/MP+unlocklockonceonce+fencermbonceonce.litmus
--
2.33.0
next reply other threads:[~2021-10-25 14:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-25 14:54 Boqun Feng [this message]
2021-10-25 14:54 ` [RFC v2 1/3] tools/memory-model: Provide extra ordering for unlock+lock pair on the same CPU Boqun Feng
2021-10-25 14:54 ` [RFC v2 2/3] tools/memory-model: doc: Describe the requirement of the litmus-tests directory Boqun Feng
2021-10-25 14:54 ` [RFC v2 3/3] tools/memory-model: litmus: Add two tests for unlock(A)+lock(B) ordering Boqun Feng
2021-10-26 7:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-28 19:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2021-10-28 23:51 ` Boqun Feng
2021-10-29 14:34 ` Alan Stern
2021-10-29 15:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2021-10-26 6:59 ` [RFC v2 0/3] memory model: Make unlock(A)+lock(B) on the same CPU RCtso Peter Zijlstra
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=20211025145416.698183-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--to=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=acme@redhat.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dlustig@nvidia.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=parri.andrea@gmail.com \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vincent.weaver@maine.edu \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.