lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Plain accesses and data races in the Linux Kernel Memory Model
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 10:03:26AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2019, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 12:54 AM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 02:41:49PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > > The patch below is my first attempt at adapting the Linux Kernel
> > > > Memory Model to handle plain accesses (i.e., those which aren't
> > > > specially marked as READ_ONCE, WRITE_ONCE, acquire, release,
> > > > read-modify-write, or lock accesses). This work is based on an
> > > > initial proposal created by Andrea Parri back in December 2017,
> > > > although it has grown a lot since then.
> > >
> > > Hello, Alan,
> > >
> > > Good stuff!!!
> > >
> > > I tried applying this in order to test it against the various litmus
> > > tests, but no joy. Could you please tell me what commit is this patch
> > > based on?
> > >
> > > Thanx, Paul
> > >
> > > > The adaptation involves two main aspects: recognizing the ordering
> > > > induced by plain accesses and detecting data races. They are handled
> > > > separately. In fact, the code for figuring out the ordering assumes
> > > > there are no data races (the idea being that if a data race is
> > > > present then pretty much anything could happen, so there's no point
> > > > worrying about it -- obviously this will have to be changed if we want
> > > > to cover seqlocks).
> >
> > Hi Alan,
> >
> > Is there a mailing list dedicated to this effort? Private messages
> > tend to lost over time, no archive, not possible to send a link or
> > show full history to anybody, etc.
>
> No specific mailing list. We've been relying on LKML.
>
> > Re seqlocks, strictly saying defining races for seqlocks is not
> > necessary. Seqlocks can be expressed without races in C by using
> > relaxed atomic loads within the read critical section. We may consider
> > this option as well.
>
> That seems like a reasonable approach.

What Alan said! ;-)

Thanx, Paul

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-15 16:25    [W:0.040 / U:13.232 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site