On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 10:39 AM Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 12 May 2020 07:19:44 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 08:19:36AM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote: > >> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 08:50:45PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote: > >> [...] > >>>> I think on top of this patch, I'd like to add a reference to the to the > >>>> litmus test in tools/memory-model/ from Documentation/rcu/. > >>> > >>> Sounds reasonable to me. But for most people, it never changes its location. > >>> Please find inline comments below. > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Just to mention my rationale for Documentation/litmus-tests/rcu/, I was > >>>> basically looking for a central place for RCU related litmus tests in the > >>>> kernel sources and the idea of this new directory came up. > >>>> > >>>> For Akira's series, > >>>> Acked-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> Thank you! > >>> > >>>> > >>>> And could we add the following patch on top of Akira's series so we still > >>>> maintain a reference to the moved RCU test?> > >>>> ---8<----------------------- > >>>> > >>>> From 52fdb57551cc769d8bd690f4f2b22de36ddece99 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > >>>> From: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Date: Mon, 11 May 2020 22:06:46 -0400 > >>>> Subject: [PATCH] docs: litmus-tests: Clarify about the RCU pre-initialization > >>>> test > >>>> > >>>> Since this test was moved to tools/memory-model/, make sure that it is > >>>> at least referenced from Documentation/litmus-tests/'s README. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> --- > >>>> Documentation/litmus-tests/README | 6 ++++-- > >>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/litmus-tests/README b/Documentation/litmus-tests/README > >>>> index ac0b270b456c1..53f09e74734a4 100644 > >>>> --- a/Documentation/litmus-tests/README > >>>> +++ b/Documentation/litmus-tests/README > >>>> @@ -11,7 +11,6 @@ tools/memory-model/README. > >>>> > >>>> atomic (/atomic derectory) > >>>> -------------------------- > >>>> - > >>>> Atomic-RMW+mb__after_atomic-is-stronger-than-acquire.litmus > >>>> Test that an atomic RMW followed by a smp_mb__after_atomic() is > >>>> stronger than a normal acquire: both the read and write parts of > >>>> @@ -23,8 +22,11 @@ Atomic-RMW-ops-are-atomic-WRT-atomic_set.litmus > >>>> > >>>> RCU (/rcu directory) > >>>> -------------------- > >>>> - > >>> > >>> I loosely followed the convention of ReST documents in putting these empty > >>> lines. But I don't mind if they are removed. > >>> > >>>> RCU+sync+read.litmus > >>>> RCU+sync+free.litmus > >>>> Both the above litmus tests demonstrate the RCU grace period guarantee > >>>> that an RCU read-side critical section can never span a grace period. > >>>> + > >>>> +MP+onceassign+derefonce.litmus (moved to tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/) > >>> > >>> As I said above, for those who don't follow developments in the lkmm branch, > >>> MP+onceassign+derefonce.litmus stays in tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/. > >>> So, > >>> > >>> +MP+onceassign+derefonce.litmus (under tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/) > >>> > >>> looks better to me. > >> > >> Yes it stays under tools/.. but is referenced here. Sounds like you agree and > >> the only change from my follow-up patch that you want is to change "moved to" > >> to "under". > >> > >> If so, Paul do you mind applying my patch and fixing this up? Or do you want > >> to apply Akira's 3-patch series first and then have me send you another one > >> on top? > > > > Let's get something that you, Akira, and Alan are good with, then I will > > apply that, either on top of or in place of the current commits (just > > tell me which). > > OK. > I'm submitting a patch [4/3] with Alan's suggested-by and Joel's and my > co-developed-by tags. > The explanation under tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/README also need the same > rewording. Sounds good to me, thanks!! - Joel
