[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87jz4tzhcs.fsf@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 11:52:35 +0200
From: Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>
To: "Boqun Feng" <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org>,
<lkmm@...ts.linux.dev>, <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, "Miguel Ojeda"
<ojeda@...nel.org>, "Alex Gaynor" <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, "Gary Guo"
<gary@...yguo.net>, Björn Roy Baron
<bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, "Benno
Lossin" <lossin@...nel.org>, "Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
"Trevor Gross" <tmgross@...ch.edu>, "Danilo Krummrich"
<dakr@...nel.org>, "Will Deacon" <will@...nel.org>, "Peter Zijlstra"
<peterz@...radead.org>, "Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@....com>, "Wedson
Almeida Filho" <wedsonaf@...il.com>, "Viresh Kumar"
<viresh.kumar@...aro.org>, "Lyude Paul" <lyude@...hat.com>, "Ingo
Molnar" <mingo@...nel.org>, "Mitchell Levy" <levymitchell0@...il.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, "Greg Kroah-Hartman"
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Linus Torvalds"
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/10] rust: sync: atomic: Add generic atomics
"Boqun Feng" <boqun.feng@...il.com> writes:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 02:15:35PM +0200, Andreas Hindborg wrote:
>> "Boqun Feng" <boqun.feng@...il.com> writes:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > +
>> > +impl<T: AllowAtomic> Atomic<T> {
>> > + /// Creates a new atomic.
>> > + pub const fn new(v: T) -> Self {
>> > + Self(Opaque::new(v))
>> > + }
>> > +
>> > + /// Creates a reference to [`Self`] from a pointer.
>> > + ///
>> > + /// # Safety
>> > + ///
>> > + /// - `ptr` has to be a valid pointer.
>> > + /// - `ptr` has to be valid for both reads and writes for the whole lifetime `'a`.
>> > + /// - For the whole lifetime of '`a`, other accesses to the object cannot cause data races
>> > + /// (defined by [`LKMM`]) against atomic operations on the returned reference.
>>
>> I feel the wording is a bit tangled here. How about something along the
>> lines of
>>
>> For the duration of `'a`, all accesses to the object must be atomic.
>>
>
> Well, a non-atomic read vs an atomic read is not a data race (for both
> Rust memory model and LKMM), so your proposal is overly restricted.
OK, my mistake then. I thought mixing marked and plain accesses would be
considered a race. I got hat from
`tools/memory-model/Documentation/explanation.txt`:
A "data race"
occurs when there are two memory accesses such that:
1. they access the same location,
2. at least one of them is a store,
3. at least one of them is plain,
4. they occur on different CPUs (or in different threads on the
same CPU), and
5. they execute concurrently.
I did not study all that documentation, so I might be missing a point or
two.
Best regards,
Andreas Hindborg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists