On Fri, 20 Mar 2020, Joel Fernandes wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 11:03:30AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Mar 2020, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote: > > > > > This adds an example for the important RCU grace period guarantee, which > > > shows an RCU reader can never span a grace period. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > .../litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus | 37 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus b/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000000000..73557772e2a32 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/RCU+sync+read.litmus > > > > Do these new tests really belong here? I thought we were adding a new > > directory under Documentation/ for litmus tests that illustrate parts > > of the LKMM or memory-barriers.txt. > > > > By contrast, the tests under tools/memory-model are merely to show > > people what litmus tests look like and how they should be written. > > I could add it to tools/memory-model/Documentation/ under a new > 'examples' directory there. We could also create an 'rcu' directory in > tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/ and add these there. Thoughts? What happened was that about a month ago, Boqun Feng added Documentation/atomic-tests for litmus tests related to handling of atomic_t types (see <https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=158276408609029&w=2>.) Should we interpose an extra directory level, making it Documentation/litmus-tests/atomic? Or Documentation/LKMM-litmus-tests/atomic? Then the new tests added here could go into Documentation/litmus-tests/rcu, or whatever. Alan
