[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180201134035.GD9182@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 13:40:35 +0000
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>
Cc: stern@...land.harvard.edu, peterz@...radead.org,
boqun.feng@...il.com, npiggin@...il.com, dhowells@...hat.com,
j.alglave@....ac.uk, luc.maranget@...ia.fr,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tools/memory-model: clarify the origin/scope of the
tool name
On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 01:03:29PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote:
> Ingo pointed out that:
>
> "The "memory model" name is overly generic, ambiguous and somewhat
> misleading, as we usually mean the virtual memory layout/model
> when we say "memory model". GCC too uses it in that sense [...]"
>
> Make it clearer that, in the context of tools/memory-model/, the term
> "memory-model" is used as shorthand for "memory consistency model" by
> calling out this convention in tools/memory-model/README.
>
> Stick to the full name in sources' headers and for the subsystem name.
>
> Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>
> ---
> tools/memory-model/MAINTAINERS | 2 +-
> tools/memory-model/README | 14 +++++++-------
> tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.bell | 2 +-
> tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat | 2 +-
> 4 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists