[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zg/M141yzwnwPbCi@andrea>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2024 12:05:11 +0200
From: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: 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,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH memory-model 2/3] Documentation/litmus-tests: Demonstrate
unordered failing cmpxchg
> DCL-broken.litmus
> - Demonstrates that double-checked locking needs more than just
> - the obvious lock acquisitions and releases.
> + Demonstrates that double-checked locking needs more than just
> + the obvious lock acquisitions and releases.
>
> DCL-fixed.litmus
> - Demonstrates corrected double-checked locking that uses
> - smp_store_release() and smp_load_acquire() in addition to the
> - obvious lock acquisitions and releases.
> + Demonstrates corrected double-checked locking that uses
> + smp_store_release() and smp_load_acquire() in addition to the
> + obvious lock acquisitions and releases.
>
> RM-broken.litmus
> - Demonstrates problems with "roach motel" locking, where code is
> - freely moved into lock-based critical sections. This example also
> - shows how to use the "filter" clause to discard executions that
> - would be excluded by other code not modeled in the litmus test.
> - Note also that this "roach motel" optimization is emulated by
> - physically moving P1()'s two reads from x under the lock.
> + Demonstrates problems with "roach motel" locking, where code is
> + freely moved into lock-based critical sections. This example also
> + shows how to use the "filter" clause to discard executions that
> + would be excluded by other code not modeled in the litmus test.
> + Note also that this "roach motel" optimization is emulated by
> + physically moving P1()'s two reads from x under the lock.
>
> - What is a roach motel? This is from an old advertisement for
> - a cockroach trap, much later featured in one of the "Men in
> - Black" movies. "The roaches check in. They don't check out."
> + What is a roach motel? This is from an old advertisement for
> + a cockroach trap, much later featured in one of the "Men in
> + Black" movies. "The roaches check in. They don't check out."
>
> RM-fixed.litmus
> - The counterpart to RM-broken.litmus, showing P0()'s two loads from
> - x safely outside of the critical section.
> + The counterpart to RM-broken.litmus, showing P0()'s two loads from
> + x safely outside of the critical section.
AFAIU, the changes above belong to patch #1. Looks like you realigned
the text, but forgot to integrate the changes in #1?
> +C cmpxchg-fail-ordered-1
> +
> +(*
> + * Result: Never
> + *
> + * Demonstrate that a failing cmpxchg() operation will act as a full
> + * barrier when followed by smp_mb__after_atomic().
> + *)
> +
> +{}
> +
> +P0(int *x, int *y, int *z)
> +{
> + int r0;
> + int r1;
> +
> + WRITE_ONCE(*x, 1);
> + r1 = cmpxchg(z, 1, 0);
> + smp_mb__after_atomic();
> + r0 = READ_ONCE(*y);
> +}
> +
> +P1(int *x, int *y, int *z)
> +{
> + int r0;
> +
> + WRITE_ONCE(*y, 1);
> + r1 = cmpxchg(z, 1, 0);
P1's r1 is undeclared (so klitmus7 will complain).
The same observation holds for cmpxchg-fail-unordered-1.litmus.
> + smp_mb__after_atomic();
> + r0 = READ_ONCE(*x);
> +}
> +
> +locations[0:r1;1:r1]
> +exists (0:r0=0 /\ 1:r0=0)
> +C cmpxchg-fail-ordered-2
> +
> +(*
> + * Result: Never
> + *
> + * Demonstrate use of smp_mb__after_atomic() to make a failing cmpxchg
> + * operation have acquire ordering.
> + *)
> +
> +{}
> +
> +P0(int *x, int *y)
> +{
> + int r0;
> + int r1;
> +
> + WRITE_ONCE(*x, 1);
> + r1 = cmpxchg(y, 0, 1);
> +}
> +
> +P1(int *x, int *y)
> +{
> + int r0;
> +
> + r1 = cmpxchg(y, 0, 1);
> + smp_mb__after_atomic();
> + r2 = READ_ONCE(*x);
P1's r1 and r2 are undeclared. P0's r0 and P1's r0 are unused.
Same for cmpxchg-fail-unordered-2.litmus.
Andrea
Powered by blists - more mailing lists