On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 05:49:41PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 08:28:35PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 04:48:43PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > Here is what I currently have for LKMM patches:
> > >
> > > 289e1c89217d4 ("locking/memory-barriers.txt: Improve documentation for writel() example")
> > > ebd50e2947de9 ("tools: memory-model: Add rmw-sequences to the LKMM")
> > > aae0c8a50d6d3 ("Documentation: Fixed a typo in atomic_t.txt")
> > > 9ba7d3b3b826e ("tools: memory-model: Make plain accesses carry dependencies")
> > >
> > > Queued for the upcoming (v6.3) merge window.
> > >
> > > c7637e2a8a27 ("tools/memory-model: Update some warning labels")
> > > 7862199d4df2 ("tools/memory-model: Unify UNLOCK+LOCK pairings to po-unlock-lock-")
> > >
> > > Are ready for the next (v6.4) merge window. If there is some
> > > reason that they should instead go into v6.3, please let us
> > > all know.
> > >
> > > a6cd5214b5ba ("tools/memory-model: Document LKMM test procedure")
> > >
> > > This goes onto the lkmm-dev pile because it is documenting how
> > > to use those scripts.
> > >
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Y9GPVnK6lQbY6vCK@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230126134604.2160-3-jonas.oberhauser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230203201913.2555494-1-joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > > 5d871b280e7f ("tools/memory-model: Add smp_mb__after_srcu_read_unlock()")
> > >
> > > These need review and perhaps further adjustment.
> > >
> > > So, am I missing any? Are there any that need to be redirected?
> >
> > The "Provide exact semantics for SRCU" patch should have:
> >
> > Portions suggested by Boqun Feng and Jonas Oberhauser.
> >
> > added at the end, together with your Reported-by: tag. With that, I
> > think it can be queued for 6.4.
>
> Thank you! Does the patch shown below work for you?
>
> (I have tentatively queued this, but can easily adjust or replace it.)
It looks fine.
Alan
