Re: Internal vs. external barriers (was: Re: Interesting LKMM litmus test)

[Alan Stern]

On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 02:54:49PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 05:35:33PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > Can you be more explicit?  Exactly what guarantees does the kernel 
> > implementation make that can't be expressed in LKMM?
> 
> I doubt that I will be able to articulate it very well, but here goes.
> 
> Within the Linux kernel, the rule for a given RCU "domain" is that if
> an event follows a grace period in pretty much any sense of the word,
> then that event sees the effects of all events in all read-side critical
> sections that began prior to the start of that grace period.
> 
> Here the senses of the word "follow" include combinations of rf, fr,
> and co, combined with the various acyclic and irreflexive relations
> defined in LKMM.

The LKMM says pretty much the same thing.  In fact, it says the event 
sees the effects of all events po-before the unlock of (not just inside) 
any read-side critical section that began prior to the start of the 
grace period.

> > And are these anything the memory model needs to worry about?
> 
> Given that several people, yourself included, are starting to use LKMM
> to analyze the Linux-kernel RCU implementations, maybe it does.
> 
> Me, I am happy either way.

Judging from your description, I don't think we have anything to worry 
about.

Alan