linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH memory-model 7/8] tools/memory-model: Add documentation about SRCU read-side critical sections

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <CAEXW_YTTFa7mC_1v-oDbFWPxHyfx58CvcCyNu+53MWNNo8d+NA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Mar 2023 22:17:14 -0400
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To:     Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>
Cc:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-team@...a.com, mingo@...nel.org, stern@...land.harvard.edu,
        will@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, boqun.feng@...il.com,
        npiggin@...il.com, dhowells@...hat.com, j.alglave@....ac.uk,
        luc.maranget@...ia.fr, akiyks@...il.com,
        Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>,
        Jonas Oberhauser <jonas.oberhauser@...wei.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH memory-model 7/8] tools/memory-model: Add documentation
 about SRCU read-side critical sections

On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 9:40 PM Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 06:02:45PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
> >
> > Expand the discussion of SRCU and its read-side critical sections in
> > the Linux Kernel Memory Model documentation file explanation.txt.  The
> > new material discusses recent changes to the memory model made in
> > commit 6cd244c87428 ("tools/memory-model: Provide exact SRCU
> > semantics").
>
> How about squashing the diff below (adjusting subject and changelog):
>
>   Andrea
>
> diff --git a/tools/memory-model/Documentation/litmus-tests.txt b/tools/memory-model/Documentation/litmus-tests.txt
> index 26554b1c5575e..acac527328a1f 100644
> --- a/tools/memory-model/Documentation/litmus-tests.txt
> +++ b/tools/memory-model/Documentation/litmus-tests.txt
> @@ -1028,32 +1028,7 @@ Limitations of the Linux-kernel memory model (LKMM) include:
>                 additional call_rcu() process to the site of the
>                 emulated rcu-barrier().
>
> -       e.      Although sleepable RCU (SRCU) is now modeled, there
> -               are some subtle differences between its semantics and
> -               those in the Linux kernel.  For example, the kernel
> -               might interpret the following sequence as two partially
> -               overlapping SRCU read-side critical sections:
> -
> -                        1  r1 = srcu_read_lock(&my_srcu);
> -                        2  do_something_1();
> -                        3  r2 = srcu_read_lock(&my_srcu);
> -                        4  do_something_2();
> -                        5  srcu_read_unlock(&my_srcu, r1);
> -                        6  do_something_3();
> -                        7  srcu_read_unlock(&my_srcu, r2);
> -
> -               In contrast, LKMM will interpret this as a nested pair of
> -               SRCU read-side critical sections, with the outer critical
> -               section spanning lines 1-7 and the inner critical section
> -               spanning lines 3-5.
> -
> -               This difference would be more of a concern had anyone
> -               identified a reasonable use case for partially overlapping
> -               SRCU read-side critical sections.  For more information
> -               on the trickiness of such overlapping, please see:
> -               https://paulmck.livejournal.com/40593.html
> -
> -       f.      Reader-writer locking is not modeled.  It can be
> +       e.      Reader-writer locking is not modeled.  It can be
>                 emulated in litmus tests using atomic read-modify-write

Good point! And for the diff:

Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>

thanks,

 - Joel


>                 operations.
>
>
>   Andrea