Hi, Just a new version trying to make forward progress on this ;-) v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210930130823.2103688-1-boqun.feng@xxxxxxxxx/ Changes since v1: * Split the patch into three to help resolve the litmus test addition discussion. * Add some explanation in patch #2 on the requirement of tests in litmus-tests directory. To summarize the change in memory model, we now guarantee in the following code: <memory access M> spin_unlock(A); spin_lock(B); <memory access N> M is ordered against N unless M is a store and N is a load. More detailed examples of this guarantee can be found in patch #3. Architecture maintainers, appreciate it that you can take a look at patch #3 and rest of whole set to confirm this guarantee works on your architectures. Alan, I split the patchset into three patches because I do think we need some sort of patch #2 so that we can have consensus about whether merge patch #3 or not. I know you want to keep litmus-tests directory as simple as possible, but it won't hurt to document the requirement. Looking forwards to your thoughts ;-) Suggestion and comments are welcome! Regards, Boqun Boqun Feng (3): tools/memory-model: Provide extra ordering for unlock+lock pair on the same CPU tools/memory-model: doc: Describe the requirement of the litmus-tests directory tools/memory-model: litmus: Add two tests for unlock(A)+lock(B) ordering .../Documentation/explanation.txt | 44 +++++++++++-------- tools/memory-model/README | 12 +++++ tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.cat | 6 +-- ...LB+unlocklockonceonce+poacquireonce.litmus | 33 ++++++++++++++ ...unlocklockonceonce+fencermbonceonce.litmus | 33 ++++++++++++++ tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/README | 8 ++++ 6 files changed, 114 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) create mode 100644 tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/LB+unlocklockonceonce+poacquireonce.litmus create mode 100644 tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/MP+unlocklockonceonce+fencermbonceonce.litmus -- 2.33.0
