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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 12:01:29 +0800 From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>, Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>, Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>, Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org Subject: [RFC 0/3] tools/memory-model: Add litmus tests for atomic APIs A recent discussion raises up the requirement for having test cases for atomic APIs: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200213085849.GL14897@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net/ , and since we already have a way to generate a test module from a litmus test with klitmus[1]. It makes sense that we add more litmus tests for atomic APIs into memory-model. So I begin to do this and the plan is to add the litmus tests we already use in atomic_t.txt, ones from Paul's litmus collection[2], and any other valuable litmus test we come up while adding the previous two kinds of tests. This patchset finishes the first part (adding atomic_t.txt litmus tests). I also improve the atomic_t.txt to make it consistent with the litmus tests. One thing to note is patch #2 requires a modification to herd and I just made a PR to Luc's repo: https://github.com/herd/herdtools7/pull/28 , so if this patchset looks good to everyone and someone plans to take it (and I assume is Paul), please wait until that PR is settled. And probably we need to bump the required herd version because of it. Comments and suggesions are welcome! Regards, Boqun [1]: http://diy.inria.fr/doc/litmus.html#klitmus [2]: https://github.com/paulmckrcu/litmus/tree/master/manual/atomic *** BLURB HERE *** Boqun Feng (3): Documentation/locking/atomic: Fix atomic-set litmus test tools/memory-model: Add a litmus test for atomic_set() tools/memory-model: Add litmus test for RMW + smp_mb__after_atomic() Documentation/atomic_t.txt | 14 ++++----- ...+mb__after_atomic-is-strong-acquire.litmus | 29 +++++++++++++++++++ .../Atomic-set-observable-to-RMW.litmus | 24 +++++++++++++++ tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/README | 8 +++++ 4 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) create mode 100644 tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/Atomic-RMW+mb__after_atomic-is-strong-acquire.litmus create mode 100644 tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/Atomic-set-observable-to-RMW.litmus -- 2.25.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists