On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 09:50:19AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Apr 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > > > I will look at this more later, reaching end of both battery and useful
> > > > attention span...
> >
> > Like the following, perhaps?
> >
> >
On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 09:50:19AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Apr 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > > > I will look at this more later, reaching end of both battery and useful
> > > > attention span...
> >
> > Like the following, perhaps?
> >
> >
On Mon, 2 Apr 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > I will look at this more later, reaching end of both battery and useful
> > > attention span...
>
> Like the following, perhaps?
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
>
On Mon, 2 Apr 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > I will look at this more later, reaching end of both battery and useful
> > > attention span...
>
> Like the following, perhaps?
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
>
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 10:40:43AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > > > In the meantime, does the cat file look to you like it correctly
> > > > models the combination of TSO and multicopy atomicity? Do the
> > > > fences really work, or did I just
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 10:40:43AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > > > In the meantime, does the cat file look to you like it correctly
> > > > models the combination of TSO and multicopy atomicity? Do the
> > > > fences really work, or did I just
On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > In the meantime, does the cat file look to you like it correctly
> > > models the combination of TSO and multicopy atomicity? Do the
> > > fences really work, or did I just get lucky with my choice of
> > > litmus tests?
> >
> > You got lucky.
On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > In the meantime, does the cat file look to you like it correctly
> > > models the combination of TSO and multicopy atomicity? Do the
> > > fences really work, or did I just get lucky with my choice of
> > > litmus tests?
> >
> > You got lucky.
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 02:04:07PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:01:25AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello!
> > > >
> > > > The prototype patch shown below
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 07:51:36PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:01:25AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > I don't quite see the point of this. You're not suggesting that we
> > have one Linux Kernel Memory Consistency Model for s390 and another
> > one for all the other
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 02:04:07PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:01:25AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello!
> > > >
> > > > The prototype patch shown below
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 07:51:36PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:01:25AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > I don't quite see the point of this. You're not suggesting that we
> > have one Linux Kernel Memory Consistency Model for s390 and another
> > one for all the other
On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:01:25AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7 to
> > > evaluate C-language litmus
On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:01:25AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7 to
> > > evaluate C-language litmus
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:01:25AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> I don't quite see the point of this. You're not suggesting that we
> have one Linux Kernel Memory Consistency Model for s390 and another
> one for all the other architectures, are you?
>
> If the idea is merely to provide a herd model
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:01:25AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> I don't quite see the point of this. You're not suggesting that we
> have one Linux Kernel Memory Consistency Model for s390 and another
> one for all the other architectures, are you?
>
> If the idea is merely to provide a herd model
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 07:20:04AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 03:48:13PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 06:42:32AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 07:20:04AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 03:48:13PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 06:42:32AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:01:25AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7 to
> > evaluate C-language litmus tests for the multicopy-atomic TSO ordering
> > provided by
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 11:01:25AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7 to
> > evaluate C-language litmus tests for the multicopy-atomic TSO ordering
> > provided by
On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Hello!
>
> The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7 to
> evaluate C-language litmus tests for the multicopy-atomic TSO ordering
> provided by s390. This patch should be viewed with great suspicion.
> It does what I
On Wed, 28 Mar 2018, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Hello!
>
> The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7 to
> evaluate C-language litmus tests for the multicopy-atomic TSO ordering
> provided by s390. This patch should be viewed with great suspicion.
> It does what I
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 03:48:13PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 06:42:32AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7 to
> > evaluate C-language litmus tests for the multicopy-atomic TSO
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 03:48:13PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 06:42:32AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7 to
> > evaluate C-language litmus tests for the multicopy-atomic TSO
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 06:42:32AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Hello!
>
> The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7 to
> evaluate C-language litmus tests for the multicopy-atomic TSO ordering
> provided by s390.
There really isn't anything s390 specific here
On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 06:42:32AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Hello!
>
> The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7 to
> evaluate C-language litmus tests for the multicopy-atomic TSO ordering
> provided by s390.
There really isn't anything s390 specific here
Hello!
The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7 to
evaluate C-language litmus tests for the multicopy-atomic TSO ordering
provided by s390. This patch should be viewed with great suspicion.
It does what I expect it to do on SB (with and without barriers),
IRIW
Hello!
The prototype patch shown below provides files required to allow herd7 to
evaluate C-language litmus tests for the multicopy-atomic TSO ordering
provided by s390. This patch should be viewed with great suspicion.
It does what I expect it to do on SB (with and without barriers),
IRIW
28 matches
Mail list logo
