On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 03:25:10PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > From: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > This commit adds a litmus test in which P0() and P1() form a lock-based S > litmus test, with the addition of P2(), which observes P0()'s and P1()'s > accesses with a full memory barrier but without the lock. This litmus > test asks whether writes carried out by two different processes under the > same lock will be seen in order by a third process not holding that lock. > The answer to this question is "yes" for all architectures supporting Hmm.. it this true? Our spin_lock() is RCpc because of PowerPC, so spin_lock()+spin_unlock() pairs don't provide transitivity, and that's why we have smp_mb__after_unlock_lock(). Is there something I'm missing? Or there is an upcomming commit to switch PowerPC's lock implementation? [Cc ppc maintainers] Regards, Boqun > the Linux kernel, but is "no" according to the current version of LKMM. > > A patch to LKMM is under development. > > Signed-off-by: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > .../ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus > > diff --git a/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus b/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..7a39a0aaa976 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus > @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ > +C ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus > + > +(* > + * Result: Sometimes > + * > + * This test shows that the ordering provided by a lock-protected S > + * litmus test (P0() and P1()) are not visible to external process P2(). > + * This is likely to change soon. > + *) > + > +{} > + > +P0(int *x, int *y, spinlock_t *mylock) > +{ > + spin_lock(mylock); > + WRITE_ONCE(*x, 1); > + WRITE_ONCE(*y, 1); > + spin_unlock(mylock); > +} > + > +P1(int *y, int *z, spinlock_t *mylock) > +{ > + int r0; > + > + spin_lock(mylock); > + r0 = READ_ONCE(*y); > + WRITE_ONCE(*z, 1); > + spin_unlock(mylock); > +} > + > +P2(int *x, int *z) > +{ > + int r1; > + int r2; > + > + r2 = READ_ONCE(*z); > + smp_mb(); > + r1 = READ_ONCE(*x); > +} > + > +exists (1:r0=1 /\ 2:r2=1 /\ 2:r1=0) > -- > 2.5.2 >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature