Re: Bug in herd7 [Was: Re: Litmus test for question from Al Viro]

> On Sun, Oct 04, 2020 at 12:16:31AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote: > > Hi Alan, > > > > Just a minor nit in the litmus test. > > > > On Sat, 3 Oct 2020 09:22:12 -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > > To expand on my statement about the LKMM's weakness regarding control > > > constructs, here is a litmus

[tip:locking/core] tools/memory-model: Add model support for spin_is_locked()

Commit-ID: 15553dcbca0638de57047e79b9fb4ea77aa04db3 Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/15553dcbca0638de57047e79b9fb4ea77aa04db3 Author: Luc Maranget <luc.maran...@inria.fr> AuthorDate: Mon, 14 May 2018 16:33:48 -0700 Committer: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> CommitDate: Tue,

[tip:locking/core] tools/memory-model: Add model support for spin_is_locked()

Commit-ID: 15553dcbca0638de57047e79b9fb4ea77aa04db3 Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/15553dcbca0638de57047e79b9fb4ea77aa04db3 Author: Luc Maranget AuthorDate: Mon, 14 May 2018 16:33:48 -0700 Committer: Ingo Molnar CommitDate: Tue, 15 May 2018 08:11:17 +0200 tools/memory-model: Add

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] riscv/atomic: Strengthen implementations with fences

> On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 04:21:37PM -0800, Daniel Lustig wrote: > > On 3/9/2018 2:57 PM, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > > On Fri, 09 Mar 2018 13:30:08 PST (-0800), parri.and...@gmail.com wrote: > > >> On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 10:54:27AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > >>> On Fri, 09 Mar 2018 10:36:44

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] riscv/atomic: Strengthen implementations with fences

> On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 04:21:37PM -0800, Daniel Lustig wrote: > > On 3/9/2018 2:57 PM, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > > On Fri, 09 Mar 2018 13:30:08 PST (-0800), parri.and...@gmail.com wrote: > > >> On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 10:54:27AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > >>> On Fri, 09 Mar 2018 10:36:44

Re: [RFC PATCH] riscv/locking: Strengthen spin_lock() and spin_unlock()

> On 2/22/2018 10:27 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 10:13:17AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >> So we have something that is not all that rare in the Linux kernel > >> community, namely two conflicting more-or-less concurrent changes. > >> This clearly needs to be

Re: [RFC PATCH] riscv/locking: Strengthen spin_lock() and spin_unlock()

> On 2/22/2018 10:27 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 10:13:17AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >> So we have something that is not all that rare in the Linux kernel > >> community, namely two conflicting more-or-less concurrent changes. > >> This clearly needs to be