[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y4uuJS6dAuRT7t6r@boqun-archlinux>
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2022 12:14:29 -0800
From: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: Jonas Oberhauser <jonas.oberhauser@...wei.com>,
Jonas Oberhauser <jonas.oberhauser@...weicloud.com>,
"stern@...land.harvard.edu" <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
"parri.andrea@...il.com" <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
"will@...nel.org" <will@...nel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"npiggin@...il.com" <npiggin@...il.com>,
"dhowells@...hat.com" <dhowells@...hat.com>,
"j.alglave@....ac.uk" <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
"luc.maranget@...ia.fr" <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
"akiyks@...il.com" <akiyks@...il.com>,
"dlustig@...dia.com" <dlustig@...dia.com>,
"joel@...lfernandes.org" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
"urezki@...il.com" <urezki@...il.com>,
"quic_neeraju@...cinc.com" <quic_neeraju@...cinc.com>,
"frederic@...nel.org" <frederic@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tools: memory-model: Make plain accesses carry
dependencies
On Sat, Dec 03, 2022 at 11:02:26AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 03, 2022 at 11:58:36AM +0000, Jonas Oberhauser wrote:
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Boqun Feng [mailto:boqun.feng@...il.com]
> > Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 7:50 PM
> >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Reviewed-by: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
> >
> > > s/Reviewed-by: Reviewed-by:/Reviewed-by:^2 to save some space ? ;-)
> >
> >
> > Oh, I didn't know I'm allowed to compress things like that! Can I use ² as well to save another character?
>
> Heh! I might miss that, and who knows? The bots might think that "²"
> was the first letter of your name. ;-)
>
> > > I wonder is this patch a first step to solve the OOTA problem you reported in OSS:
> > > https://static.sched.com/hosted_files/osseu2022/e1/oss-eu22-jonas.pdf
> > > If so maybe it's better to put the link in the commit log I think.
> >
> > It's not directly related to that specific problem, it does solve some other OOTA issues though.
> > If you think we should link to the talk, there's also a video with slightly more updated slides from the actual talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFDKhIxKhoQ
> > do you think I should link to both then?
>
> It is not hard for me to add that in if people believe that it should be
> included. But default is lazy in this case. ;-)
>
I brought this up because, as we recently experience in RCU code, we
need answers of "why we did this?" to the future us ;-)
I agree with Alan, this seems like a good idea, but having some big
picture of why we do this may be better.
Regards,
Boqun
> Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists