Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-207922-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Message-ID: <cb49624b-ae79-4ba5-b550-f73962317032@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:08:54 +0200
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 0/4] tools/memory-model: Define more of LKMM in
 tools/memory-model
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: paulmck@kernel.org, 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, luc.maranget@inria.fr,
 akiyks@gmail.com, dlustig@nvidia.com, joel@joelfernandes.org,
 urezki@gmail.com, quic_neeraju@quicinc.com, frederic@kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20240604152922.495908-1-jonas.oberhauser@huaweicloud.com>
 <88c1ebc8-4805-4d1d-868a-889043899979@rowland.harvard.edu>
 <bbc3bd10-3bf5-4b1a-a275-dd328c42e307@huaweicloud.com>
 <f93f140b-13bc-4d00-adee-46cc1c016480@rowland.harvard.edu>
From: Jonas Oberhauser <jonas.oberhauser@huaweicloud.com>
In-Reply-To: <f93f140b-13bc-4d00-adee-46cc1c016480@rowland.harvard.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Am 6/8/2024 um 3:00 AM schrieb Alan Stern:
> On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 09:58:42PM +0200, Jonas Oberhauser wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 6/4/2024 um 7:56 PM schrieb Alan Stern:
>>> Just to clarify: Your first step encompasses patches 1 - 3, and the
>>> second step is patch 4.  The first three patches can be applied now, but
>>> the last one needs to wait until herd7 has been updated.  Is this all
>>> correct?
>>
>> Exactly.
> 
> With regard to patch 4, how much thought have you and Hernan given to
> backward compatibility?  Once herd7 is changed, old memory model files
> will no longer work correctly.

Yes, Akira pointed this out too.

My thought back then was to update herd now, and wait with the fourth 
patch for a while until most people who run the LKMM would have 
upgraded. However...

> To avoid being so disruptive, perhaps the changes to herd7 should be
> under control of a new command-line or config-file switch.  If the
> switch is enabled, the new simplified code gets used; otherwise herd7
> would continue to use its old built-in rules for special tags
... I like that idea a lot better actually. I think it needs to be 
placed into the files, or people will get strange, silent results.

But then I think we need to make sure that there's no internal behaviors 
left. I don't want to introduce more flags in the future to turn off 
other internal behavior.

jonas