linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] tools/memory-model, Documentation/litmus-test: Sort out location of litmus test and README

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.2005120942100.21033-100000@netrider.rowland.org>
Date:   Tue, 12 May 2020 09:44:22 -0400 (EDT)
From:   Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
cc:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <vpillai@...italocean.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
        Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
        Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] tools/memory-model, Documentation/litmus-test: Sort
 out location of litmus test and README

On Mon, 11 May 2020, Joel Fernandes wrote:

> From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org>
> Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 22:06:46 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] docs: litmus-tests: Clarify about the RCU pre-initialization
>  test
> 
> Since this test was moved to tools/memory-model/, make sure that it is
> at least referenced from Documentation/litmus-tests/'s README.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/litmus-tests/README | 6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/litmus-tests/README b/Documentation/litmus-tests/README
> index ac0b270b456c1..53f09e74734a4 100644
> --- a/Documentation/litmus-tests/README
> +++ b/Documentation/litmus-tests/README
> @@ -11,7 +11,6 @@ tools/memory-model/README.
>  
>  atomic (/atomic derectory)
>  --------------------------
> -
>  Atomic-RMW+mb__after_atomic-is-stronger-than-acquire.litmus
>      Test that an atomic RMW followed by a smp_mb__after_atomic() is
>      stronger than a normal acquire: both the read and write parts of
> @@ -23,8 +22,11 @@ Atomic-RMW-ops-are-atomic-WRT-atomic_set.litmus
>  
>  RCU (/rcu directory)
>  --------------------
> -
>  RCU+sync+read.litmus
>  RCU+sync+free.litmus
>      Both the above litmus tests demonstrate the RCU grace period guarantee
>      that an RCU read-side critical section can never span a grace period.
> +
> +MP+onceassign+derefonce.litmus (moved to tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/)
> +   Demonstrates that rcu_assign_pointer() and rcu_dereference() to
> +   ensure that an RCU reader will not see pre-initialization garbage.

The grammar in this sentence is awful.  Should the first "that" be 
changed to "the use of"?

Alan