[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 13:04:44 -0500 (EST)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
cc: David Goldblatt <davidtgoldblatt@...il.com>,
<mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>, <triegel@...hat.com>,
<libc-alpha@...rceware.org>, <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>,
<will.deacon@....com>, <peterz@...radead.org>,
<boqun.feng@...il.com>, <npiggin@...il.com>, <dhowells@...hat.com>,
<j.alglave@....ac.uk>, <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>, <akiyks@...il.com>,
<dlustig@...dia.com>, <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Linux: Implement membarrier function
On Wed, 12 Dec 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > Or am I still missing something here?
> > >
> > > You tell me...
> >
> > I think I am on board. ;-)
>
> And more to the point, here is a three-process variant showing a cycle
> that is permitted:
>
>
> P0 P1 P2
> Wa=2 Wb=2 Wc=2
> mb0s
> [mb01] [mb02]
> mb0e
> Rb=0 Rc=0 Ra=0
>
> As can be seen by reordering it as follows:
>
> P0 P1 P2
> Ra=0
> Wa=2
> mb0s
> [mb01]
> Rc=0
> Wc=2
> [mb02]
> mb0e
> Rb=0
> Wb=2
>
> Make sense?
You got it!
Alan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists