linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] tools/memory-model/Documentation: Fix typos in explanation.txt

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 1 Oct 2019 15:30:34 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc:     Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
        LKMM Maintainers -- Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>,
        Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.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@...nel.org>,
        Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] tools/memory-model/Documentation: Fix typos in
 explanation.txt

On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 05:01:23PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 01:39:47PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > This patch fixes a few minor typos and improves word usage in a few
> > places in the Linux Kernel Memory Model's explanation.txt file.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
> > 
> 
> Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>

I queued all three for further review, and added Joel's Reviewed-by
to the first one.  Thank you both!

							Thanx, Paul

> thanks,
> 
>  - Joel
> 
> 
> > ---
> > 
> >  tools/memory-model/Documentation/explanation.txt |   10 +++++-----
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Index: usb-devel/tools/memory-model/Documentation/explanation.txt
> > ===================================================================
> > --- usb-devel.orig/tools/memory-model/Documentation/explanation.txt
> > +++ usb-devel/tools/memory-model/Documentation/explanation.txt
> > @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ goes like this:
> >  	P0 stores 1 to buf before storing 1 to flag, since it executes
> >  	its instructions in order.
> >  
> > -	Since an instruction (in this case, P1's store to flag) cannot
> > +	Since an instruction (in this case, P0's store to flag) cannot
> >  	execute before itself, the specified outcome is impossible.
> >  
> >  However, real computer hardware almost never follows the Sequential
> > @@ -419,7 +419,7 @@ example:
> >  
> >  The object code might call f(5) either before or after g(6); the
> >  memory model cannot assume there is a fixed program order relation
> > -between them.  (In fact, if the functions are inlined then the
> > +between them.  (In fact, if the function calls are inlined then the
> >  compiler might even interleave their object code.)
> >  
> >  
> > @@ -499,7 +499,7 @@ different CPUs (external reads-from, or
> >  
> >  For our purposes, a memory location's initial value is treated as
> >  though it had been written there by an imaginary initial store that
> > -executes on a separate CPU before the program runs.
> > +executes on a separate CPU before the main program runs.
> >  
> >  Usage of the rf relation implicitly assumes that loads will always
> >  read from a single store.  It doesn't apply properly in the presence
> > @@ -955,7 +955,7 @@ atomic update.  This is what the LKMM's
> >  THE PRESERVED PROGRAM ORDER RELATION: ppo
> >  -----------------------------------------
> >  
> > -There are many situations where a CPU is obligated to execute two
> > +There are many situations where a CPU is obliged to execute two
> >  instructions in program order.  We amalgamate them into the ppo (for
> >  "preserved program order") relation, which links the po-earlier
> >  instruction to the po-later instruction and is thus a sub-relation of
> > @@ -1572,7 +1572,7 @@ and there are events X, Y and a read-sid
> >  
> >  	2. X comes "before" Y in some sense (including rfe, co and fr);
> >  
> > -	2. Y is po-before Z;
> > +	3. Y is po-before Z;
> >  
> >  	4. Z is the rcu_read_unlock() event marking the end of C;
> >  
> > 
> >