[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20240501232132.1785861-3-paulmck@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2024 16:21:31 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...a.com,
mingo@...nel.org
Cc: stern@...land.harvard.edu,
parri.andrea@...il.com,
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,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>,
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: [PATCH memory-model 3/4] Documentation/atomic_t: Emphasize that failed atomic operations give no ordering
The ORDERING section of Documentation/atomic_t.txt can easily be read as
saying that conditional atomic RMW operations that fail are ordered when
those operations have the _acquire() or _release() suffixes. This is
not the case, therefore update this section to make it clear that failed
conditional atomic RMW operations provide no ordering.
Reported-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>
Cc: Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>
Cc: Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Acked-by: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>
Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
---
Documentation/atomic_t.txt | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/atomic_t.txt b/Documentation/atomic_t.txt
index d7adc6d543db4..bee3b1bca9a7b 100644
--- a/Documentation/atomic_t.txt
+++ b/Documentation/atomic_t.txt
@@ -171,14 +171,14 @@ The rule of thumb:
- RMW operations that are conditional are unordered on FAILURE,
otherwise the above rules apply.
-Except of course when an operation has an explicit ordering like:
+Except of course when a successful operation has an explicit ordering like:
{}_relaxed: unordered
{}_acquire: the R of the RMW (or atomic_read) is an ACQUIRE
{}_release: the W of the RMW (or atomic_set) is a RELEASE
Where 'unordered' is against other memory locations. Address dependencies are
-not defeated.
+not defeated. Conditional operations are still unordered on FAILURE.
Fully ordered primitives are ordered against everything prior and everything
subsequent. Therefore a fully ordered primitive is like having an smp_mb()
--
2.40.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists