Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751734AbbBRNrP (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 18 Feb 2015 08:47:15 -0500
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:38629 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750851AbbBRNrN (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 18 Feb 2015 08:47:13 -0500
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:47:06 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@parallels.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        oleg@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] [PATCH] sched: Add smp_rmb() in task rq locking
 cycles
Message-ID: <20150218134706.GW5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20150217104516.12144.85911.stgit@tkhai>
 <1424170021.5749.22.camel@tkhai>
 <20150217121258.GM5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20150217130523.GV24151@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20150217160532.GW4166@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20150217183636.GR5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20150217215231.GK4166@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150217215231.GK4166@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1980
Lines: 43

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 01:52:31PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> I could do a table per communication style.  For example, message
> passing looks like this (give or take likely errors in the table):
> 
> 	Side CPU	Top CPU
> 	--------	-------
> 	X = 1;		r1 = Y;
> 	<some barrier>	<some barrier>
> 	Y = 1;		r2 = X;
> 
> 	assert(r1 == 0 || r2 == 1);
> 
> 
>       |   mb  |  wmb  |  rmb  |  rbd  |  acq  |  rel  |  ctl  |
>  -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
>    mb |   Y   |       |   Y   |   y   |   Y   |       |   Y   +
>  -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
>   wmb |   Y   |       |   Y   |   y   |   Y   |       |   Y   +
>  -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
>   rmb |       |       |       |       |       |       |       +
>  -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
>   rbd |       |       |       |       |       |       |       +
>  -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
>   acq |       |       |       |       |       |       |       +
>  -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
>   rel |   Y   |       |   Y   |   y   |   Y   |       |   Y   +
>  -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
>   ctl |       |       |       |       |       |       |       +
>  -----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
> 
> Here "Y" says that the barrier pair works, "y" says that it can
> work but requires an artificial dependency, and " " says that
> it does not work.

I would maybe do s/artificial/additional/, the pointer deref in RCU is
not really artificial, is it?

Also, how many communication styles do you envision to enumerate?
--
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/