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;
Date:   Fri, 9 Feb 2018 17:05:03 -0800
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org,
        parri.andrea@gmail.com, 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, akiyks@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tip/lkmm 04/10] EXP litmus_tests:  Add comments
 explaining tests' purposes
Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
References: <1518186031-17997-4-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1802091345180.1460-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1802091345180.1460-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Message-Id: <20180210010503.GD3617@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 01:46:30PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Feb 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> 
> > This commit adds comments to the litmus tests summarizing what these
> > tests are intended to demonstrate.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > [ paulmck: Apply Andrea's and Alan's feedback. ]
> > ---
> 
> > --- a/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/IRIW+poonceonces+OnceOnce.litmus
> > +++ b/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/IRIW+poonceonces+OnceOnce.litmus
> > @@ -1,5 +1,15 @@
> >  C IRIW+poonceonces+OnceOnce
> >  
> > +(*
> > + * Result: Never
> > + *
> > + * Test of independent reads from independent writes with nothing
> > + * between each pairs of reads.  In other words, is anything at all
> > + * needed to cause two different reading processes to agree on the order
> > + * of a pair of writes, where each write is to a different variable by a
> > + * different process?
> > + *)
> 
> The result should be Sometimes.

Right you are, and better yet, the memory model agrees with you.

I have fixed this, thank you for the careful review!

							Thanx, Paul