MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1392666947.18779.6838.camel@triegel.csb>
References: <20140207180216.GP4250@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<1391992071.18779.99.camel@triegel.csb>
	<CA+55aFwTwCPMpYTL_vCgNNP0hE8s2sgB0iw-79=xoj99V0JUNA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1392183564.18779.2187.camel@triegel.csb>
	<20140212180739.GB4250@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<CA+55aFw3S82GYdtnV2nJCvBGcuZf6kXdF5b7Vp9yb21QKr49Jw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140213002355.GI4250@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<1392321837.18779.3249.camel@triegel.csb>
	<20140214020144.GO4250@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<1392352981.18779.3800.camel@triegel.csb>
	<20140214172920.GQ4250@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<CA+55aFx9CbgrfK4rBVYD75y2KoWiO90dSYsAW83O-tYVLK-gkg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+55aFypfiTFwundih8QEA6ZwVGk=g5L4sabsN0932eih5knOQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1392486310.18779.6447.camel@triegel.csb>
	<CA+55aFwTrt_6m1inNHQkk74i7uPkHNnacwHiBgioZSXieAs5Sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1392666947.18779.6838.camel@triegel.csb>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 12:18:21 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+55aFwUnRVk6q3VZeYjWfduoHcExW=Pht6jgp=4bBSaLHNPMA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] arch: atomic rework
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>
Cc: Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ramana Radhakrishnan <Ramana.Radhakrishnan@arm.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>,
        "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Which example do you have in mind here?  Haven't we resolved all the
> debated examples, or did I miss any?

Well, Paul seems to still think that the standard possibly allows
speculative writes or possibly value speculation in ways that break
the hardware-guaranteed orderings.

And personally, I can't read standards paperwork. It is invariably
written in some basically impossible-to-understand lawyeristic mode,
and then it is read by people (compiler writers) that intentionally
try to mis-use the words and do language-lawyering ("that depends on
what the meaning of 'is' is"). The whole "lvalue vs rvalue expression
vs 'what is a volatile access'" thing for C++ was/is a great example
of that.

So quite frankly, as a result I refuse to have anything to do with the
process directly.

                 Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/