On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 07:03:53AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sun, Oct 04, 2020 at 10:38:46PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 04, 2020 at 04:31:46PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > Nice simple example! How about like this? > > > > > > Thanx, Paul > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > commit c964f404eabe4d8ce294e59dda713d8c19d340cf > > > Author: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Date: Sun Oct 4 16:27:03 2020 -0700 > > > > > > manual/kernel: Add a litmus test with a hidden dependency > > > > > > This commit adds a litmus test that has a data dependency that can be > > > hidden by control flow. In this test, both the taken and the not-taken > > > branches of an "if" statement must be accounted for in order to properly > > > analyze the litmus test. But herd7 looks only at individual executions > > > in isolation, so fails to see the dependency. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > diff --git a/manual/kernel/crypto-control-data.litmus b/manual/kernel/crypto-control-data.litmus > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..6baecf9 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/manual/kernel/crypto-control-data.litmus > > > @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ > > > +C crypto-control-data > > > +(* > > > + * LB plus crypto-control-data plus data > > > + * > > > + * Result: Sometimes > > > + * > > > + * This is an example of OOTA and we would like it to be forbidden. > > > + * The WRITE_ONCE in P0 is both data-dependent and (at the hardware level) > > > + * control-dependent on the preceding READ_ONCE. But the dependencies are > > > + * hidden by the form of the conditional control construct, hence the > > > + * name "crypto-control-data". The memory model doesn't recognize them. > > > + *) > > > + > > > +{} > > > + > > > +P0(int *x, int *y) > > > +{ > > > + int r1; > > > + > > > + r1 = 1; > > > + if (READ_ONCE(*x) == 0) > > > + r1 = 0; > > > + WRITE_ONCE(*y, r1); > > > +} > > > + > > > +P1(int *x, int *y) > > > +{ > > > + WRITE_ONCE(*x, READ_ONCE(*y)); > > > +} > > > + > > > +exists (0:r1=1) > > > > Considering the bug in herd7 pointed out by Akira, we should rewrite P1 as: > > > > P1(int *x, int *y) > > { > > int r2; > > > > r = READ_ONCE(*y); > > WRITE_ONCE(*x, r2); > > } > > > > Other than that, this is fine. > > Updated as suggested by Will, like this? LGTM as well, FWIW: Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> thanks, - Joel > > Thanx, Paul > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > commit adf43667b702582331d68acdf3732a6a017a182c > Author: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Sun Oct 4 16:27:03 2020 -0700 > > manual/kernel: Add a litmus test with a hidden dependency > > This commit adds a litmus test that has a data dependency that can be > hidden by control flow. In this test, both the taken and the not-taken > branches of an "if" statement must be accounted for in order to properly > analyze the litmus test. But herd7 looks only at individual executions > in isolation, so fails to see the dependency. > > Signed-off-by: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> > > diff --git a/manual/kernel/crypto-control-data.litmus b/manual/kernel/crypto-control-data.litmus > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..cdcdec9 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/manual/kernel/crypto-control-data.litmus > @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ > +C crypto-control-data > +(* > + * LB plus crypto-control-data plus data > + * > + * Result: Sometimes > + * > + * This is an example of OOTA and we would like it to be forbidden. > + * The WRITE_ONCE in P0 is both data-dependent and (at the hardware level) > + * control-dependent on the preceding READ_ONCE. But the dependencies are > + * hidden by the form of the conditional control construct, hence the > + * name "crypto-control-data". The memory model doesn't recognize them. > + *) > + > +{} > + > +P0(int *x, int *y) > +{ > + int r1; > + > + r1 = 1; > + if (READ_ONCE(*x) == 0) > + r1 = 0; > + WRITE_ONCE(*y, r1); > +} > + > +P1(int *x, int *y) > +{ > + int r2; > + > + r2 = READ_ONCE(*y); > + WRITE_ONCE(*x, r2); > +} > + > +exists (0:r1=1)