[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200522143201.GB32434@rowland.harvard.edu>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 10:32:01 -0400
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, parri.andrea@...il.com,
will@...nel.org, boqun.feng@...il.com, npiggin@...il.com,
dhowells@...hat.com, j.alglave@....ac.uk, luc.maranget@...ia.fr,
akiyks@...il.com, dlustig@...dia.com, joel@...lfernandes.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
andriin@...com
Subject: Re: Some -serious- BPF-related litmus tests
On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 11:44:07AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 05:38:50PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > Just wanted to call your attention to some pretty cool and pretty serious
> > litmus tests that Andrii did as part of his BPF ring-buffer work:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200517195727.279322-3-andriin@fb.com/
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> I find:
>
> smp_wmb()
> smp_store_release()
>
> a _very_ weird construct. What is that supposed to even do?
Indeed, it looks like one or the other of those is redundant (depending
on the context).
Also, what use is a spinlock that is accessed in only one thread?
Finally, I doubt that these tests belong under tools/memory-model.
Shouldn't they go under the new Documentation/ directory for litmus
tests? And shouldn't the patch update a README file?
Alan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists