Received: by 10.223.176.5 with SMTP id f5csp614754wra; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 04:31:59 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x2264PdIKR7VvJHPuRrkjAtN69qzfKPWZdyRheXN8G1aKVeVtsn0eTdUeBpvdQ0GujBAQAszW X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8501:: with SMTP id bj1-v6mr2470847plb.5.1518179519643; Fri, 09 Feb 2018 04:31:59 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1518179519; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=m/kq0kAc0FdNREArQycNNjWi0YLizSWcz7hXlUTGSaHDPv+RNQS3NILU5E89FvHwsJ 0JnOQzfeSaEj5r0tHvUj1Y2gNH8m2Jd11bUmqKjjPt1pjuajdZCjurJRF4oA+ZGvFJa2 0e6b+MdzTrxZJsxhUMwHXxeMUZdLFUwTytXL1Mhgh8x50RAoEPQhvtPX/dC1J7gM138S ubztgFx5d1dPrWI2KZVI64CpLV+PF5eb2dVkWgjLT0yD7N2ibbW5wcZ8MMkp+Wmffw9m krBcJOnFEdQw3luHOnR0p9YP6kGhn0fbPbqtGTDCWVBZGp2tHcQMg9tA/r0ZGrTDX/tQ Bn/A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:cc:to :from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=XzTWSA4iIDmFrtSe27ap8tvtXyM5+c+XkhV7vIFBEO8=; b=DZzRwwAnSXDnMRsG9arTog6WGTZAglx6CDfu37pTMtzDiAtysoHikIYfcAt9HI23rw 77fnZMWN4ZQ112uOcmDY5l3erb4yeai8cyGceG2zNo+/NgpXIJYVinP+Xq35UIjglznC 1Y2E7Dfcx1nSA7PEbPKtxsF1al8kN3Ak7bE7044zmVpXm2Nqp6E3jLYhOvkZ8eQY6syN FZtOc36vH194HZNOc+FTjCHiRXd+z5FIjsCtcOvUkU08DysZG3yW/KbpxBp12fBw/9Da 2NfvW59fbrutLwOYvIRcZYpUkwc3OguX0JcGTf+4TEQ10Vtm5vB7/Nq01KD+986lMgRl V60g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id y5si13925pfg.267.2018.02.09.04.31.45; Fri, 09 Feb 2018 04:31:59 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751307AbeBIMa7 (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 9 Feb 2018 07:30:59 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:44278 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750981AbeBIMa5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Feb 2018 07:30:57 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w19CUnEd107286 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 07:30:56 -0500 Received: from e16.ny.us.ibm.com (e16.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.206]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2g1924f0mm-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 09 Feb 2018 07:30:56 -0500 Received: from localhost by e16.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 07:30:55 -0500 Received: from b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (9.57.198.29) by e16.ny.us.ibm.com (146.89.104.203) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 07:30:50 -0500 Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.108]) by b01cxnp23034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id w19CUnSD46792920; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 12:30:49 GMT Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id A644DB205D; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 07:27:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (unknown [9.85.160.93]) by b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 728F4B204E; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 07:27:43 -0500 (EST) Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BBFD516C3901; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 04:31:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2018 04:31:00 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Andrea Parri Cc: Akira Yokosawa , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, stern@rowland.harvard.edu, will.deacon@arm.com, peterz@infradead.org, boqun.feng@gmail.com, npiggin@gmail.com, dhowells@redhat.com, j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk, luc.maranget@inria.fr, corbet@lwn.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: cross-reference "tools/memory-model/" Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20180203012103.GD3617@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <8b4db282-2705-ed96-cf23-b0cdf94bbac8@gmail.com> <20180204183708.GA10437@andrea> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180204183708.GA10437@andrea> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18020912-0024-0000-0000-0000032130D6 X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00008503; HX=3.00000241; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000250; SDB=6.00987190; UDB=6.00501060; IPR=6.00766549; BA=6.00005821; NDR=6.00000001; ZLA=6.00000005; ZF=6.00000009; ZB=6.00000000; ZP=6.00000000; ZH=6.00000000; ZU=6.00000002; MB=3.00019456; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2018-02-09 12:30:53 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18020912-0025-0000-0000-000046ECDC55 Message-Id: <20180209123100.GY3617@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2018-02-09_06:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=3 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1709140000 definitions=main-1802090160 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Feb 04, 2018 at 07:37:08PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote: > Hi Akira, > > On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 01:14:10AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > CC: Andrea > > > > This is intentionally off the list, as I was not cc'd in the thread. > > If you think it is worthwhile, could you help me join the thread by > > forwarding the following part as a reply to your message, plus CC: to me. > > [CCing lists and other people] > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 17:21:03AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 10:12:48AM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote: > > >> Recent efforts led to the specification of a memory consistency model > > >> for the Linux kernel [1], which "can (roughly speaking) be thought of > > >> as an automated version of memory-barriers.txt" and which is (in turn) > > >> "accompanied by extensive documentation on its use and its design". > > >> > > >> Make sure that the (occasional) reader of memory-barriers.txt will be > > >> aware of these developments. > > >> > > >> [1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=151687290114799&w=2 > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri > > > > > > I am inclined to pull in something along these lines, but would like > > > some feedback on the wording, especially how "official" we want to > > > make the memory model to be. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > The change log of commit e7720af5f9ac ("locking/Documentation: Add disclaimer") says: > > > > It appears people are reading this document as a requirements list for > > building hardware. This is not the intent of this document. Nor is it > > particularly suited for this purpose. > > > > The primary purpose of this document is our collective attempt to define > > a set of primitives that (hopefully) allow us to write correct code on > > the myriad of SMP platforms Linux supports. > > > > Its a definite work in progress as our understanding of these platforms, > > and memory ordering in general, progresses. > > > > Nor does being mentioned in this document mean we think its a > > particularly good idea; the data dependency barrier required by Alpha > > being a prime example. Yes we have it, no you're insane to require it > > when building new hardware. > > > > My take on the Linux Kernel memory-consistency model is a supplement of > > memory-barriers.txt and the disclaimer also applies to the memory model. > > > > > > > > If I don't hear otherwise in a couple of days, I will pull this as is. > > > > > > Thanx, Paul > > > > > >> --- > > >> Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 4 +++- > > >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > >> > > >> diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt > > >> index a863009849a3b..8cc3f098f4a7d 100644 > > >> --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt > > >> +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt > > >> @@ -17,7 +17,9 @@ meant as a guide to using the various memory barriers provided by Linux, but > > >> in case of any doubt (and there are many) please ask. > > >> > > >> To repeat, this document is not a specification of what Linux expects from > > >> -hardware. > > >> +hardware. For such a specification, in the form of a memory consistency > > >> +model, and for documentation about its usage and its design, the reader is > > >> +referred to "tools/memory-model/". > > >> > > > > Adding cross-reference in this way can _weaken_ the message of the disclaimer. > > Thank you for your remarks; I do share the same concern. > > > What about adding it in the previous sentence as the patch appended bellow? > > I do like this idea: I believe that my phrasing (and that "what Linux > expects from hardware") may be easily subject to misinterpretation... > which your solution can avoid. Any objections to Akira's patch below? (Give or take the usual wordsmithing.) Andrea, should I interpret your paragraph above ask an Acked-by? Thanx, Paul > Andrea > > > > > > The tag use in the change log may need adjustments. I'm not familiar with the > > manner in modifying other persons' patches. Of course, the wording itself can > > be improved further. Any feedback is welcome. > > > > Thanks, Akira > > > > >> The purpose of this document is twofold: > > >> > > >> -- > > >> 2.7.4 > > >> > > > > ----8<------- > > From 714e8c4b09acd6e965de116532dce05070b9e636 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Akira Yokosawa > > Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 00:28:36 +0900 > > Subject: [PATCH] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: cross-reference "tools/memory-model/" > > > > Recent efforts led to the specification of a memory consistency model > > for the Linux kernel [1], which "can (roughly speaking) be thought of > > as an automated version of memory-barriers.txt" and which is (in turn) > > "accompanied by extensive documentation on its use and its design". > > > > Make sure that the (occasional) reader of memory-barriers.txt will be > > aware of these developments. > > > > [1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=151687290114799&w=2 > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri > > Signed-off-by: Akira Yokosawa > > --- > > Documentation/memory-barriers.txt | 4 +++- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt > > index 479ecec..975488d 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt > > @@ -14,7 +14,9 @@ DISCLAIMER > > This document is not a specification; it is intentionally (for the sake of > > brevity) and unintentionally (due to being human) incomplete. This document is > > meant as a guide to using the various memory barriers provided by Linux, but > > -in case of any doubt (and there are many) please ask. > > +in case of any doubt (and there are many) please ask. For clarification of such > > +doubt, in the form of a memory consistency model, and for documentation about > > +its usage and its design, the reader is referred to "tools/memory-model/". > > > > To repeat, this document is not a specification of what Linux expects from > > hardware. > > -- > > 2.7.4 > > > > > > >