Re: [PATCH RFC tools/memory-model] Add s390.{cfg,cat}

[Paul E. McKenney]

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 ordering
> > provided by s390.  
> 
> There really isn't anything s390 specific here is there? That is, would
> this not equally work for x86 and sparc, both of which are similarly TSO
> ?

As I understand it, there is a difference.  The difference from TSO
systems such as x86 is that s390 is multicopy atomic as well as TSO.
In contrast, x86 is TSO as well as other-multicopy-atomic.  I must defer
to Martin and Christian for details -- this should be interpreted as a
feeble first attempt on my part, not any sort of IBM-approved definition
of s390.  ;-)

> Given that, should this not be called TSO instead of s390 ?

I agree completely with a single tso.cfg, TSO.cfg, or whatever name,
as opposed to a bunch of identical files for x86, SPARC, ...

							Thanx, Paul