Re: [RFC] tools/memory-model: Rule out OOTA

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 09:39:05AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 09:26:32AM +0200, Hernan Ponce de Leon wrote:
> > On 7/23/2025 2:43 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 06, 2025 at 10:40:03PM +0100, Jonas Oberhauser wrote:
> > > > The current LKMM allows out-of-thin-air (OOTA), as evidenced in the following
> > > > example shared on this list a few years ago:
> > > 
> > > Apologies for being slow, but I have finally added the litmus tests in
> > > this email thread to the https://github.com/paulmckrcu/litmus repo.
> > 
> > I do not understand some of the comments in the preamble of the tests:
> > 
> > (*
> >  * Result: Never
> >  *
> >  * But Sometimes in LKMM as of early 2025, given that 42 is a possible
> >  * value for things like S19..
> >  *
> >  * https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250106214003.504664-1-jonas.oberhauser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >  *)
> > 
> > I see that herd7 reports one of the states to be [b]=S16. Is this supposed
> > to be some kind of symbolic state (i.e., any value is possible)?
> 
> Exactly!
> 
> > The value in the "Result" is what we would like the model to say if we would
> > have a perfect version of dependencies, right?
> 
> In this case, yes.

I should hasten to add that, compiler optimizations being what they are,
"perfect" may or may not be attainable, and even if attainable, might
not be maintainable.

I am pretty sure that you all already understood that, but I felt the
need to make it explicit.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul