On 1 December 2014 at 23:47, Maxim Uvarov <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > Paul E. McKenney (kernel rcu maintainer) just published new articles about > memory models and atomic things. I guess it might be interesting for > everybody: Yes good stuff. Thanks for digging this up.
> > N4321: Towards Implementation and Use of memory order consume > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4321.pdf Looks very interesting. I will save it for this evening in the sofa. > > Linux-Kernel Memory Model > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4322.html Note that much of the memory barriers semantics etc are defined using C11/C++11 memory models (which extend the Release Consistency model from where acquire and release definitions come). Why cross the river for water? Linux seems to invent the optimal solution for each and every use case in the kernel, leading to a lot of locking and atomics primitives. To quote the article: "The Linux kernel has an embarrassingly large number of locking primitives". I think this makes the Linux model difficult to use (the pieces of it that you use would have to be a consistent subset used in the proper way) and to understand (and understanding is important for correct usage). Also ODP implementations are expected to handle a lot of the mutual exclusion and synchronization in dedicated hardware, obviating the need for a lot of performance optimized software solutions. > > Out-of-Thin-Air Execution is Vacuous > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4323.html > > Use Cases for Thread-Local Storage > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4324.html > > > BR, > Maxim. > > _______________________________________________ > lng-odp mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp _______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
