Add a citation to Marco's LF mentorship session presentation entitled
"The Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer"
[ paulmck: Apply Marco Elver feedback. ]
Reported-by: Marco Elver <elver@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Jade Alglave <j.alglave@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Daniel Lustig <dlustig@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
tools/memory-model/Documentation/access-marking.txt | 10 +++++++---
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/memory-model/Documentation/access-marking.txt b/tools/memory-model/Documentation/access-marking.txt
index 65778222183e3..f531b0837356b 100644
--- a/tools/memory-model/Documentation/access-marking.txt
+++ b/tools/memory-model/Documentation/access-marking.txt
@@ -6,7 +6,8 @@ normal accesses to shared memory, that is "normal" as in accesses that do
not use read-modify-write atomic operations. It also describes how to
document these accesses, both with comments and with special assertions
processed by the Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer (KCSAN). This discussion
-builds on an earlier LWN article [1].
+builds on an earlier LWN article [1] and Linux Foundation mentorship
+session [2].
ACCESS-MARKING OPTIONS
@@ -31,7 +32,7 @@ example:
WRITE_ONCE(a, b + data_race(c + d) + READ_ONCE(e));
Neither plain C-language accesses nor data_race() (#1 and #2 above) place
-any sort of constraint on the compiler's choice of optimizations [2].
+any sort of constraint on the compiler's choice of optimizations [3].
In contrast, READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE() (#3 and #4 above) restrict the
compiler's use of code-motion and common-subexpression optimizations.
Therefore, if a given access is involved in an intentional data race,
@@ -594,5 +595,8 @@ REFERENCES
[1] "Concurrency bugs should fear the big bad data-race detector (part 2)"
https://lwn.net/Articles/816854/
-[2] "Who's afraid of a big bad optimizing compiler?"
+[2] "The Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer"
+ https://www.linuxfoundation.org/webinars/the-kernel-concurrency-sanitizer
+
+[3] "Who's afraid of a big bad optimizing compiler?"
https://lwn.net/Articles/793253/
--
2.40.1
