Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 5 Oct 2020 08:54:42 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To:     Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@inria.fr>
Cc:     Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
        Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>, parri.andrea@gmail.com,
        will@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, boqun.feng@gmail.com,
        npiggin@gmail.com, dhowells@redhat.com, j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk,
        dlustig@nvidia.com, joel@joelfernandes.org,
        viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Bug in herd7 [Was: Re: Litmus test for question from Al Viro]
Message-ID: <20201005155441.GZ29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org
References: <20201001045116.GA5014@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
 <20201001161529.GA251468@rowland.harvard.edu>
 <20201001213048.GF29330@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
 <20201003132212.GB318272@rowland.harvard.edu>
 <045c643f-6a70-dfdf-2b1e-f369a667f709@gmail.com>
 <20201003171338.GA323226@rowland.harvard.edu>
 <20201005151557.4bcxumreoekgwmsa@yquem.inria.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201005151557.4bcxumreoekgwmsa@yquem.inria.fr>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 05:15:57PM +0200, Luc Maranget wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 04, 2020 at 12:16:31AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> > > Hi Alan,
> > > 
> > > Just a minor nit in the litmus test.
> > > 
> > > On Sat, 3 Oct 2020 09:22:12 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > > To expand on my statement about the LKMM's weakness regarding control 
> > > > constructs, here is a litmus test to illustrate the issue.  You might 
> > > > want to add this to one of the archives.
> > > > 
> > > > Alan
> > > > 
> > > > C crypto-control-data
> > > > (*
> > > >  * LB plus crypto-control-data plus data
> > > >  *
> > > >  * Expected result: allowed
> > > >  *
> > > >  * This is an example of OOTA and we would like it to be forbidden.
> > > >  * The WRITE_ONCE in P0 is both data-dependent and (at the hardware level)
> > > >  * control-dependent on the preceding READ_ONCE.  But the dependencies are
> > > >  * hidden by the form of the conditional control construct, hence the 
> > > >  * name "crypto-control-data".  The memory model doesn't recognize them.
> > > >  *)
> > > > 
> > > > {}
> > > > 
> > > > P0(int *x, int *y)
> > > > {
> > > > 	int r1;
> > > > 
> > > > 	r1 = 1;
> > > > 	if (READ_ONCE(*x) == 0)
> > > > 		r1 = 0;
> > > > 	WRITE_ONCE(*y, r1);
> > > > }
> > > > 
> > > > P1(int *x, int *y)
> > > > {
> > > > 	WRITE_ONCE(*x, READ_ONCE(*y));
> > > 
> > > Looks like this one-liner doesn't provide data-dependency of y -> x on herd7.
> > 
> > You're right.  This is definitely a bug in herd7.
> > 
> > Luc, were you aware of this?
> 
> Hi Alan,
> 
> No I was not aware of it. Now I am, the bug is normally fixed in the master branch of herd git deposit.
> <https://github.com/herd/herdtools7/commit/0f3f8188a326d5816a82fb9970fcd209a2678859>
> 
> Thanks for the report.

Thank you very much, Luc!  I will rebuild and give it a try.

							Thanx, Paul