[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20181116064310.GU4170@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 22:43:10 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: LKMM Maintainers -- Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>,
Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.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>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] tools/memory-model: Add SRCU support
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 11:19:24AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> Paul and other LKMM maintainers:
>
> The following series of patches adds support for SRCU to the Linux
> Kernel Memory Model. That is, it adds the srcu_read_lock(),
> srcu_read_unlock(), and synchronize_srcu() primitives to the model.
>
> Patch 1/3 does some renaming of the RCU parts of the
> memory model's existing CAT code, to help distinguish them
> from the upcoming SRCU parts.
>
> Patch 2/3 refactors the definitions of some RCU relations
> in the CAT code, in a way that the SRCU portions will need.
>
> Patch 3/3 actually adds the SRCU support.
>
> This new code requires herd7 version 7.51+4(dev) or later (now
> available in the herdtools7 github repository) to run. Thanks to Luc
> for making the necessary changes to support SRCU.
These patches pass the tests that I have constructed, and also regression
tests, very nice! Applied and pushed, thank you.
> The code does not check that the index argument passed to
> srcu_read_unlock() is the same as the value returned by the
> corresponding srcu_read_lock() call. This is deemed to be a semantic
> issue, not directly relevant to the memory model.
Agreed.
If I understand correctly, there are in theory some use cases that these
patches do not support, for example:
r1 = srcu_read_lock(a);
do_1();
r2 = srcu_read_lock(a);
do_2();
srcu_read_unlock(a, r1);
do_3();
srcu_read_unlock(a, r2);
In practice, I would be more worried about this had I ever managed to
find a non-bogus use case for this pattern. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists