Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-22643-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Message-ID: <a759c808-a14c-4370-b47a-7db908fa3127@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 11:08:29 -0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] membarrier: Create
 Documentation/scheduler/membarrier.rst
Content-Language: en-US
To: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
Cc: paul.walmsley@sifive.com, palmer@dabbelt.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu,
 mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, paulmck@kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net,
 mmaas@google.com, hboehm@google.com, striker@us.ibm.com,
 charlie@rivosinc.com, rehn@rivosinc.com, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
 linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20240110145533.60234-1-parri.andrea@gmail.com>
 <20240110145533.60234-3-parri.andrea@gmail.com>
 <63046420-264a-4e7c-b45c-17f0486ba4d9@infradead.org>
 <ZZ7qiIDFDEMEfNiS@andrea>
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZZ7qiIDFDEMEfNiS@andrea>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


On 1/10/24 11:05, Andrea Parri wrote:
> Hi Randy,
> 
>>> +MEMBARRIER_CMD_{PRIVATE,GLOBAL}_EXPEDITED - Architecture requirements
>>> +=====================================================================
>>> +
>>> +Memory barriers before updating rq->curr
>>> +----------------------------------------
>>> +
>>> +The command requires each architecture to have a full memory barrier after
>>> +coming from user-space, before updating rq->curr.  This barrier is implied
>>> +by the sequence rq_lock(); smp_mb__after_spinlock() in __schedule().  The
>>> +barrier matches a full barrier in the proximity of the membarrier system
>>> +call exit, cf. membarrier_{private,global}_expedited().
>>> +
>>
>> What does "The command" refer to above and below, please?
> 
> The term was meant to refer to any of MEMBARRIER_CMD_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED and
> MEMBARRIER_CMD_GLOBAL_EXPEDITED (from the section title); FWIW, this seems
> to align with the terminology adopted in MEMBARRIER(2) for example.

I see.

> Mmh, unless I get a better idea, I'll expand those occurrences to:
> 
>   "The commands MEMBARRIER_CMD_PRIVATE_EXPEDITED and MEMBARRIER_CMD_GLOBAL_EXPEDIDED
>    require [...]"
                                                                            _EXPEDITED

OK, that's better IMO. Thanks.

-- 
#Randy