[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YwlbpPHzp8tj0Gn0@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2022 01:47:48 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
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
Subject: Re: "Verifying and Optimizing Compact NUMA-Aware Locks on Weak
Memory Models"
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 01:10:39PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > - some babbling about a missing propagation -- ISTR Linux if stuffed
> > full of them, specifically we require stores to auto propagate
> > without help from barriers
>
> Not a missing propagation; a late one.
>
> Don't understand what you mean by "auto propagate without help from
> barriers".
Linux hard relies on:
CPU0 CPU1
WRITE_ONCE(foo, 1); while (!READ_ONCE(foo));
making forward progress.
There were a few 'funny' uarchs that were broken, see for example commit
a30718868915f.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists