From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50C27C282C2 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 17:38:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 194972175B for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 17:38:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2393145AbfBMRhv (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2019 12:37:51 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:36824 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2390226AbfBMRhv (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2019 12:37:51 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098417.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x1DHSsTP145630 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 12:37:49 -0500 Received: from e12.ny.us.ibm.com (e12.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.202]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2qmnswx4p9-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 12:37:49 -0500 Received: from localhost by e12.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 17:37:48 -0000 Received: from b01cxnp22035.gho.pok.ibm.com (9.57.198.25) by e12.ny.us.ibm.com (146.89.104.199) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Wed, 13 Feb 2019 17:37:44 -0000 Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.108]) by b01cxnp22035.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x1DHbhm017563696 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 13 Feb 2019 17:37:43 GMT Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C92CB205F; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 17:37:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CE18B2067; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 17:37:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (unknown [9.70.82.41]) by b01ledav003.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 17:37:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-W541 (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B64CF16C5EB2; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 09:37:44 -0800 (PST) From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org Cc: stern@rowland.harvard.edu, 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, "Paul E . McKenney" Subject: [PATCH memory-model 2/7] tools/memory-model: Refactor some RCU relations Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 09:37:38 -0800 X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.17.1 In-Reply-To: <20190213173650.GA26078@linux.ibm.com> References: <20190213173650.GA26078@linux.ibm.com> X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19021317-0060-0000-0000-0000030AD0EA X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00010589; HX=3.00000242; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000279; SDB=6.01160548; UDB=6.00605725; IPR=6.00941102; MB=3.00025565; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2019-02-13 17:37:47 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19021317-0061-0000-0000-0000484AC02F Message-Id: <20190213173743.26682-2-paulmck@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-02-13_10:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1902130124 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Alan Stern In preparation for adding support for SRCU, refactor the definitions of rcu-fence, rcu-rscsi, rcu-link, and rb by moving the po and po? terms from the first two to the second two. An rcu-gp relation is added; it is equivalent to gp with the po and po? terms removed. This is necessary because for SRCU, we will have to use the loc relation to check that the terms at the start and end of each disjunct in the definition of rcu-fence refer to the same srcu_struct location. If these terms are hidden behind po and po?, there's no way to carry out this check. Signed-off-by: Alan Stern Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney Tested-by: Andrea Parri --- tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat | 25 +++++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat b/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat index ab9de9c1234b..b8e6197f05af 100644 --- a/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat +++ b/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat @@ -91,32 +91,37 @@ acyclic pb as propagation (*******) (* - * Effect of read-side critical section proceeds from the rcu_read_lock() - * onward on the one hand and from the rcu_read_unlock() backwards on the + * Effects of read-side critical sections proceed from the rcu_read_unlock() + * backwards on the one hand, and from the rcu_read_lock() forwards on the * other hand. + * + * In the definition of rcu-fence below, the po term at the left-hand side + * of each disjunct and the po? term at the right-hand end have been factored + * out. They have been moved into the definitions of rcu-link and rb. *) -let rcu-rscsi = po ; rcu-rscs^-1 ; po? +let rcu-gp = [Sync-rcu] (* Compare with gp *) +let rcu-rscsi = rcu-rscs^-1 (* * The synchronize_rcu() strong fence is special in that it can order not * one but two non-rf relations, but only in conjunction with an RCU * read-side critical section. *) -let rcu-link = hb* ; pb* ; prop +let rcu-link = po? ; hb* ; pb* ; prop ; po (* * Any sequence containing at least as many grace periods as RCU read-side * critical sections (joined by rcu-link) acts as a generalized strong fence. *) -let rec rcu-fence = gp | - (gp ; rcu-link ; rcu-rscsi) | - (rcu-rscsi ; rcu-link ; gp) | - (gp ; rcu-link ; rcu-fence ; rcu-link ; rcu-rscsi) | - (rcu-rscsi ; rcu-link ; rcu-fence ; rcu-link ; gp) | +let rec rcu-fence = rcu-gp | + (rcu-gp ; rcu-link ; rcu-rscsi) | + (rcu-rscsi ; rcu-link ; rcu-gp) | + (rcu-gp ; rcu-link ; rcu-fence ; rcu-link ; rcu-rscsi) | + (rcu-rscsi ; rcu-link ; rcu-fence ; rcu-link ; rcu-gp) | (rcu-fence ; rcu-link ; rcu-fence) (* rb orders instructions just as pb does *) -let rb = prop ; rcu-fence ; hb* ; pb* +let rb = prop ; po ; rcu-fence ; po? ; hb* ; pb* irreflexive rb as rcu -- 2.17.1