On 2018/11/27 09:17:46 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 01:26:42AM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote: >>> commit 72f61917f12236514a70017d1ebafb9b8d34a9b6 >>> Author: Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.ibm.com> >>> Date: Mon Nov 26 14:26:43 2018 -0800 >>> >>> tools/memory-model: Update README for addition of SRCU >>> >>> This commit updates the section on LKMM limitations to no longer say >>> that SRCU is not modeled, but instead describe how LKMM's modeling of >>> SRCU departs from the Linux-kernel implementation. >>> >>> TL;DR: There is no known valid use case that cares about the Linux >>> kernel's ability to have partially overlapping SRCU read-side critical >>> sections. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paul...@linux.ibm.com> >> >> Indeed!, >> >> Acked-by: Andrea Parri <andrea.pa...@amarulasolutions.com> > > Thank you, applied! > > I moved this commit and Alan's three SRCU commits to the branch destined > for the upcoming merge window.
We need to bump the version of herdtools7 in "REQUIREMENTS". Would it be 7.52? Removing the explicit version number might be a better idea. Just say "The latest version of ...". Thoughts? Thanks, Akira > > Thanx, Paul > >> Andrea >> >> >>> >>> diff --git a/tools/memory-model/README b/tools/memory-model/README >>> index 0f2c366518c6..9d7d4f23503f 100644 >>> --- a/tools/memory-model/README >>> +++ b/tools/memory-model/README >>> @@ -221,8 +221,29 @@ The Linux-kernel memory model has the following >>> limitations: >>> additional call_rcu() process to the site of the >>> emulated rcu-barrier(). >>> >>> - e. Sleepable RCU (SRCU) is not modeled. It can be >>> - emulated, but perhaps not simply. >>> + e. Although sleepable RCU (SRCU) is now modeled, there >>> + are some subtle differences between its semantics and >>> + those in the Linux kernel. For example, the kernel >>> + might interpret the following sequence as two partially >>> + overlapping SRCU read-side critical sections: >>> + >>> + 1 r1 = srcu_read_lock(&my_srcu); >>> + 2 do_something_1(); >>> + 3 r2 = srcu_read_lock(&my_srcu); >>> + 4 do_something_2(); >>> + 5 srcu_read_unlock(&my_srcu, r1); >>> + 6 do_something_3(); >>> + 7 srcu_read_unlock(&my_srcu, r2); >>> + >>> + In contrast, LKMM will interpret this as a nested pair of >>> + SRCU read-side critical sections, with the outer critical >>> + section spanning lines 1-7 and the inner critical section >>> + spanning lines 3-5. >>> + >>> + This difference would be more of a concern had anyone >>> + identified a reasonable use case for partially overlapping >>> + SRCU read-side critical sections. For more information, >>> + please see: https://paulmck.livejournal.com/40593.html >>> >>> f. Reader-writer locking is not modeled. It can be >>> emulated in litmus tests using atomic read-modify-write >>> >> >