Re: [PATCH 1/3] tools/memory-model/Documentation: Fix typos in explanation.txt
From: Joel Fernandes
Date: Tue Oct 01 2019 - 17:01:29 EST
On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 01:39:47PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> This patch fixes a few minor typos and improves word usage in a few
> places in the Linux Kernel Memory Model's explanation.txt file.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
thanks,
- Joel
> ---
>
> tools/memory-model/Documentation/explanation.txt | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> Index: usb-devel/tools/memory-model/Documentation/explanation.txt
> ===================================================================
> --- usb-devel.orig/tools/memory-model/Documentation/explanation.txt
> +++ usb-devel/tools/memory-model/Documentation/explanation.txt
> @@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ goes like this:
> P0 stores 1 to buf before storing 1 to flag, since it executes
> its instructions in order.
>
> - Since an instruction (in this case, P1's store to flag) cannot
> + Since an instruction (in this case, P0's store to flag) cannot
> execute before itself, the specified outcome is impossible.
>
> However, real computer hardware almost never follows the Sequential
> @@ -419,7 +419,7 @@ example:
>
> The object code might call f(5) either before or after g(6); the
> memory model cannot assume there is a fixed program order relation
> -between them. (In fact, if the functions are inlined then the
> +between them. (In fact, if the function calls are inlined then the
> compiler might even interleave their object code.)
>
>
> @@ -499,7 +499,7 @@ different CPUs (external reads-from, or
>
> For our purposes, a memory location's initial value is treated as
> though it had been written there by an imaginary initial store that
> -executes on a separate CPU before the program runs.
> +executes on a separate CPU before the main program runs.
>
> Usage of the rf relation implicitly assumes that loads will always
> read from a single store. It doesn't apply properly in the presence
> @@ -955,7 +955,7 @@ atomic update. This is what the LKMM's
> THE PRESERVED PROGRAM ORDER RELATION: ppo
> -----------------------------------------
>
> -There are many situations where a CPU is obligated to execute two
> +There are many situations where a CPU is obliged to execute two
> instructions in program order. We amalgamate them into the ppo (for
> "preserved program order") relation, which links the po-earlier
> instruction to the po-later instruction and is thus a sub-relation of
> @@ -1572,7 +1572,7 @@ and there are events X, Y and a read-sid
>
> 2. X comes "before" Y in some sense (including rfe, co and fr);
>
> - 2. Y is po-before Z;
> + 3. Y is po-before Z;
>
> 4. Z is the rcu_read_unlock() event marking the end of C;
>
>
>