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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20191009114809.8643-1-christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
 <20191021113327.22365-1-christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> <20191023121603.GA16344@andrea.guest.corp.microsoft.com>
 <CACT4Y+Y86HFnQGHyxv+f32tKDJXnRxmL7jQ3tGxVcksvtK3L7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191024113155.GA7406@andrea.guest.corp.microsoft.com> <CACT4Y+Z2-mm6Qk0cecJdiA5B_VsQ1v8k2z+RWrDQv6dTNFXFog@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191024130502.GA11335@andrea.guest.corp.microsoft.com> <CACT4Y+ahUr11pQQ7=dw80Abj5owUPnPdufbMYvsKLM6iDg5QQg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191024134319.GA12693@andrea.guest.corp.microsoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <20191024134319.GA12693@andrea.guest.corp.microsoft.com>
From:   Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Oct 2019 15:58:40 +0200
Message-ID: <CACT4Y+ZXQyqgBvwgb6cy7NP5FTBbktq5j4ZyySp7jrbcJwFUTA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] taskstats: fix data-race
To:     Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
Cc:     Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, bsingharora@gmail.com,
        Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
        stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
        syzbot <syzbot+c5d03165a1bd1dead0c1@syzkaller.appspotmail.com>,
        syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 3:43 PM Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > But why? I think kernel contains lots of such cases and it seems to be
> > officially documented by the LKMM:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/tools/memory-model/Documentation/explanation.txt
> > address dependencies and ppo
>
> Well, that same documentation also alerts about some of the pitfalls
> developers can incur while relying on dependencies.  I'm sure you're
> more than aware of some of the debate surrounding these issues.

I thought that LKMM is finally supposed to stop all these
centi-threads around subtle details of ordering. And not we finally
have it. And it says that using address-dependencies is legal. And you
are one of the authors. And now you are arguing here that we better
not use it :) Can we have some black/white yes/no for code correctness
reflected in LKMM please :) If we are banning address dependencies,
don't we need to fix all of rcu uses?