[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1807051021510.1697-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2018 10:23:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>,
LKMM Maintainers -- Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tools/memory-model: Add write ordering by release-acquire
and by locks
On Wed, 4 Jul 2018, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 04:28:52AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 01:28:17PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > PS: Paul, is the patch which introduced rel-rf-acq-po currently present
> > > in any of your branches? I couldn't find it.
> >
> > It is not, I will add it back in. I misinterpreted your "drop this
> > patch" on 2/2 as "drop both patches". Please accept my apologies!
> >
> > Just to double-check, the patch below should be added, correct?
>
> Hang on, I'm not sure this patch is quite right either. We need to reach
> agreement on whether or not we want to support native RCpc acquire/release
> instructions before we work out what to do with this relation.
Agreed. Paul, please leave both patches reverted. I will send
replacements.
Alan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists