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 C0F58C282C2 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 17:38:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A3A92175B for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 17:38:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2393220AbfBMRiV (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2019 12:38:21 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:49176 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2393137AbfBMRhw (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Feb 2019 12:37:52 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x1DHTn5t021435 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 12:37:51 -0500 Received: from e15.ny.us.ibm.com (e15.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.205]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2qmpenuxga-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 12:37:50 -0500 Received: from localhost by e15.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 13 Feb 2019 17:37:50 -0000 Received: from b01cxnp22035.gho.pok.ibm.com (9.57.198.25) by e15.ny.us.ibm.com (146.89.104.202) 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 x1DHbhwa24183020 (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 80529B206C; 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 6A76FB2068; 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 C242B16C5FBF; 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 4/7] tools/memory-model: Update README for addition of SRCU Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 09:37:40 -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: 19021317-0068-0000-0000-000003934B0C 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 17:37:48 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19021317-0069-0000-0000-0000477EC7E8 Message-Id: <20190213173743.26682-4-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 This commit updates the section on LKMM limitations to no longer say that SRCU is not modeled, but instead describe how LKMM's modeling of SRCU departs from the Linux-kernel implementation. TL;DR: There is no known valid use case that cares about the Linux kernel's ability to have partially overlapping SRCU read-side critical sections. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney Acked-by: Andrea Parri --- tools/memory-model/README | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/memory-model/README b/tools/memory-model/README index 0f2c366518c6..9d7d4f23503f 100644 --- a/tools/memory-model/README +++ b/tools/memory-model/README @@ -221,8 +221,29 @@ The Linux-kernel memory model has the following limitations: additional call_rcu() process to the site of the emulated rcu-barrier(). - e. Sleepable RCU (SRCU) is not modeled. It can be - emulated, but perhaps not simply. + e. Although sleepable RCU (SRCU) is now modeled, there + are some subtle differences between its semantics and + those in the Linux kernel. For example, the kernel + might interpret the following sequence as two partially + overlapping SRCU read-side critical sections: + + 1 r1 = srcu_read_lock(&my_srcu); + 2 do_something_1(); + 3 r2 = srcu_read_lock(&my_srcu); + 4 do_something_2(); + 5 srcu_read_unlock(&my_srcu, r1); + 6 do_something_3(); + 7 srcu_read_unlock(&my_srcu, r2); + + In contrast, LKMM will interpret this as a nested pair of + SRCU read-side critical sections, with the outer critical + section spanning lines 1-7 and the inner critical section + spanning lines 3-5. + + This difference would be more of a concern had anyone + identified a reasonable use case for partially overlapping + SRCU read-side critical sections. For more information, + please see: https://paulmck.livejournal.com/40593.html f. Reader-writer locking is not modeled. It can be emulated in litmus tests using atomic read-modify-write -- 2.17.1