[RFC][PATCH 4/4] tools/memory-model: Distinguish between syntactic and semantic tags

Jonas Oberhauser posted 4 patches 1 year, 8 months ago
There is a newer version of this series
[RFC][PATCH 4/4] tools/memory-model: Distinguish between syntactic and semantic tags
Posted by Jonas Oberhauser 1 year, 8 months ago
Not all tags that are always there syntactically also provide semantic
membership in the corresponding set. For example, an 'acquire tag on a
write does not imply that the write is finally in the Acquire set and
provides acquire ordering.

To distinguish in those cases between the syntactic tags and actual
sets, we capitalize the former, so 'ACQUIRE tags may be present on both
reads and writes, but only reads will appear in the Acquire set.

For tags where the two concepts are the same we do not use specific
capitalization to make this distinction.

Reported-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jonas Oberhauser <jonas.oberhauser@huaweicloud.com>
---
 tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.bell |  22 ++--
 tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.def  | 176 +++++++++++++--------------
 2 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.bell b/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.bell
index 08fa1ccb1328..045d94a8eabf 100644
--- a/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.bell
+++ b/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.bell
@@ -13,18 +13,18 @@
 
 "Linux-kernel memory consistency model"
 
-enum Accesses = 'once (*READ_ONCE,WRITE_ONCE*) ||
-		'release (*smp_store_release*) ||
-		'acquire (*smp_load_acquire*) ||
-		'noreturn (* R of non-return RMW *) ||
-		'mb (*xchg(),compare_exchange(),...*)
+enum Accesses = 'ONCE (*READ_ONCE,WRITE_ONCE*) ||
+		'RELEASE (*smp_store_release*) ||
+		'ACQUIRE (*smp_load_acquire*) ||
+		'NORETURN (* R of non-return RMW *) ||
+		'MB (*xchg(),compare_exchange(),...*)
 instructions R[Accesses]
 instructions W[Accesses]
 instructions RMW[Accesses]
 
 enum Barriers = 'wmb (*smp_wmb*) ||
 		'rmb (*smp_rmb*) ||
-		'mb (*smp_mb*) ||
+		'MB (*smp_mb*) ||
 		'barrier (*barrier*) ||
 		'rcu-lock (*rcu_read_lock*)  ||
 		'rcu-unlock (*rcu_read_unlock*) ||
@@ -38,10 +38,10 @@ instructions F[Barriers]
 
 (* Remove impossible tags, such as Acquire on a store or failed RMW *)
 let FailedRMW = RMW \ (domain(rmw) | range(rmw))
-let Acquire = Acquire \ W \ FailedRMW
-let Release = Release \ R \ FailedRMW
-let Mb = Mb \ FailedRMW
-let Noreturn = Noreturn \ W
+let Acquire = ACQUIRE \ W \ FailedRMW
+let Release = RELEASE \ R \ FailedRMW
+let Mb = MB \ FailedRMW
+let Noreturn = NORETURN \ W
 
 (* SRCU *)
 enum SRCU = 'srcu-lock || 'srcu-unlock || 'sync-srcu
@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ flag ~empty rcu-rscs & (po ; [Sync-srcu] ; po) as invalid-sleep
 flag ~empty different-values(srcu-rscs) as srcu-bad-value-match
 
 (* Compute marked and plain memory accesses *)
-let Marked = (~M) | IW | Once | Release | Acquire | domain(rmw) | range(rmw) |
+let Marked = (~M) | IW | ONCE | RELEASE | ACQUIRE | MB | domain(rmw) | range(rmw) |
 		LKR | LKW | UL | LF | RL | RU | Srcu-lock | Srcu-unlock
 let Plain = M \ Marked
 
diff --git a/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.def b/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.def
index a12b96c547b7..001366ff3fb4 100644
--- a/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.def
+++ b/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.def
@@ -6,18 +6,18 @@
 // which appeared in ASPLOS 2018.
 
 // ONCE
-READ_ONCE(X) __load{once}(X)
-WRITE_ONCE(X,V) { __store{once}(X,V); }
+READ_ONCE(X) __load{ONCE}(X)
+WRITE_ONCE(X,V) { __store{ONCE}(X,V); }
 
 // Release Acquire and friends
-smp_store_release(X,V) { __store{release}(*X,V); }
-smp_load_acquire(X) __load{acquire}(*X)
-rcu_assign_pointer(X,V) { __store{release}(X,V); }
-rcu_dereference(X) __load{once}(X)
-smp_store_mb(X,V) { __store{once}(X,V); __fence{mb}; }
+smp_store_release(X,V) { __store{RELEASE}(*X,V); }
+smp_load_acquire(X) __load{ACQUIRE}(*X)
+rcu_assign_pointer(X,V) { __store{RELEASE}(X,V); }
+rcu_dereference(X) __load{ONCE}(X)
+smp_store_mb(X,V) { __store{ONCE}(X,V); __fence{MB}; }
 
 // Fences
-smp_mb() { __fence{mb}; }
+smp_mb() { __fence{MB}; }
 smp_rmb() { __fence{rmb}; }
 smp_wmb() { __fence{wmb}; }
 smp_mb__before_atomic() { __fence{before-atomic}; }
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@ smp_mb__after_srcu_read_unlock() { __fence{after-srcu-read-unlock}; }
 barrier() { __fence{barrier}; }
 
 // Exchange
-xchg(X,V)  __xchg{mb}(X,V)
-xchg_relaxed(X,V) __xchg{once}(X,V)
-xchg_release(X,V) __xchg{release}(X,V)
-xchg_acquire(X,V) __xchg{acquire}(X,V)
-cmpxchg(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{mb}(X,V,W)
-cmpxchg_relaxed(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{once}(X,V,W)
-cmpxchg_acquire(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{acquire}(X,V,W)
-cmpxchg_release(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{release}(X,V,W)
+xchg(X,V)  __xchg{MB}(X,V)
+xchg_relaxed(X,V) __xchg{ONCE}(X,V)
+xchg_release(X,V) __xchg{RELEASE}(X,V)
+xchg_acquire(X,V) __xchg{ACQUIRE}(X,V)
+cmpxchg(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{MB}(X,V,W)
+cmpxchg_relaxed(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{ONCE}(X,V,W)
+cmpxchg_acquire(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{ACQUIRE}(X,V,W)
+cmpxchg_release(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{RELEASE}(X,V,W)
 
 // Spinlocks
 spin_lock(X) { __lock(X); }
@@ -72,75 +72,75 @@ atomic_inc(X)   { __atomic_op(X,+,1); }
 atomic_dec(X)   { __atomic_op(X,-,1); }
 atomic_andnot(V,X) { __atomic_op(X,&~,V); }
 
-atomic_add_return(V,X) __atomic_op_return{mb}(X,+,V)
-atomic_add_return_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_op_return{once}(X,+,V)
-atomic_add_return_acquire(V,X) __atomic_op_return{acquire}(X,+,V)
-atomic_add_return_release(V,X) __atomic_op_return{release}(X,+,V)
-atomic_fetch_add(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{mb}(X,+,V)
-atomic_fetch_add_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{once}(X,+,V)
-atomic_fetch_add_acquire(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{acquire}(X,+,V)
-atomic_fetch_add_release(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{release}(X,+,V)
-
-atomic_fetch_and(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{mb}(X,&,V)
-atomic_fetch_and_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{once}(X,&,V)
-atomic_fetch_and_acquire(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{acquire}(X,&,V)
-atomic_fetch_and_release(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{release}(X,&,V)
-
-atomic_fetch_or(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{mb}(X,|,V)
-atomic_fetch_or_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{once}(X,|,V)
-atomic_fetch_or_acquire(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{acquire}(X,|,V)
-atomic_fetch_or_release(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{release}(X,|,V)
-
-atomic_fetch_xor(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{mb}(X,^,V)
-atomic_fetch_xor_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{once}(X,^,V)
-atomic_fetch_xor_acquire(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{acquire}(X,^,V)
-atomic_fetch_xor_release(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{release}(X,^,V)
-
-atomic_inc_return(X) __atomic_op_return{mb}(X,+,1)
-atomic_inc_return_relaxed(X) __atomic_op_return{once}(X,+,1)
-atomic_inc_return_acquire(X) __atomic_op_return{acquire}(X,+,1)
-atomic_inc_return_release(X) __atomic_op_return{release}(X,+,1)
-atomic_fetch_inc(X) __atomic_fetch_op{mb}(X,+,1)
-atomic_fetch_inc_relaxed(X) __atomic_fetch_op{once}(X,+,1)
-atomic_fetch_inc_acquire(X) __atomic_fetch_op{acquire}(X,+,1)
-atomic_fetch_inc_release(X) __atomic_fetch_op{release}(X,+,1)
-
-atomic_sub_return(V,X) __atomic_op_return{mb}(X,-,V)
-atomic_sub_return_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_op_return{once}(X,-,V)
-atomic_sub_return_acquire(V,X) __atomic_op_return{acquire}(X,-,V)
-atomic_sub_return_release(V,X) __atomic_op_return{release}(X,-,V)
-atomic_fetch_sub(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{mb}(X,-,V)
-atomic_fetch_sub_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{once}(X,-,V)
-atomic_fetch_sub_acquire(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{acquire}(X,-,V)
-atomic_fetch_sub_release(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{release}(X,-,V)
-
-atomic_dec_return(X) __atomic_op_return{mb}(X,-,1)
-atomic_dec_return_relaxed(X) __atomic_op_return{once}(X,-,1)
-atomic_dec_return_acquire(X) __atomic_op_return{acquire}(X,-,1)
-atomic_dec_return_release(X) __atomic_op_return{release}(X,-,1)
-atomic_fetch_dec(X) __atomic_fetch_op{mb}(X,-,1)
-atomic_fetch_dec_relaxed(X) __atomic_fetch_op{once}(X,-,1)
-atomic_fetch_dec_acquire(X) __atomic_fetch_op{acquire}(X,-,1)
-atomic_fetch_dec_release(X) __atomic_fetch_op{release}(X,-,1)
-
-atomic_xchg(X,V) __xchg{mb}(X,V)
-atomic_xchg_relaxed(X,V) __xchg{once}(X,V)
-atomic_xchg_release(X,V) __xchg{release}(X,V)
-atomic_xchg_acquire(X,V) __xchg{acquire}(X,V)
-atomic_cmpxchg(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{mb}(X,V,W)
-atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{once}(X,V,W)
-atomic_cmpxchg_acquire(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{acquire}(X,V,W)
-atomic_cmpxchg_release(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{release}(X,V,W)
-
-atomic_sub_and_test(V,X) __atomic_op_return{mb}(X,-,V) == 0
-atomic_dec_and_test(X)  __atomic_op_return{mb}(X,-,1) == 0
-atomic_inc_and_test(X)  __atomic_op_return{mb}(X,+,1) == 0
-atomic_add_negative(V,X) __atomic_op_return{mb}(X,+,V) < 0
-atomic_add_negative_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_op_return{once}(X,+,V) < 0
-atomic_add_negative_acquire(V,X) __atomic_op_return{acquire}(X,+,V) < 0
-atomic_add_negative_release(V,X) __atomic_op_return{release}(X,+,V) < 0
-
-atomic_fetch_andnot(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{mb}(X,&~,V)
-atomic_fetch_andnot_acquire(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{acquire}(X,&~,V)
-atomic_fetch_andnot_release(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{release}(X,&~,V)
-atomic_fetch_andnot_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{once}(X,&~,V)
+atomic_add_return(V,X) __atomic_op_return{MB}(X,+,V)
+atomic_add_return_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_op_return{ONCE}(X,+,V)
+atomic_add_return_acquire(V,X) __atomic_op_return{ACQUIRE}(X,+,V)
+atomic_add_return_release(V,X) __atomic_op_return{RELEASE}(X,+,V)
+atomic_fetch_add(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{MB}(X,+,V)
+atomic_fetch_add_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{ONCE}(X,+,V)
+atomic_fetch_add_acquire(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{ACQUIRE}(X,+,V)
+atomic_fetch_add_release(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{RELEASE}(X,+,V)
+
+atomic_fetch_and(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{MB}(X,&,V)
+atomic_fetch_and_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{ONCE}(X,&,V)
+atomic_fetch_and_acquire(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{ACQUIRE}(X,&,V)
+atomic_fetch_and_release(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{RELEASE}(X,&,V)
+
+atomic_fetch_or(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{MB}(X,|,V)
+atomic_fetch_or_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{ONCE}(X,|,V)
+atomic_fetch_or_acquire(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{ACQUIRE}(X,|,V)
+atomic_fetch_or_release(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{RELEASE}(X,|,V)
+
+atomic_fetch_xor(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{MB}(X,^,V)
+atomic_fetch_xor_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{ONCE}(X,^,V)
+atomic_fetch_xor_acquire(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{ACQUIRE}(X,^,V)
+atomic_fetch_xor_release(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{RELEASE}(X,^,V)
+
+atomic_inc_return(X) __atomic_op_return{MB}(X,+,1)
+atomic_inc_return_relaxed(X) __atomic_op_return{ONCE}(X,+,1)
+atomic_inc_return_acquire(X) __atomic_op_return{ACQUIRE}(X,+,1)
+atomic_inc_return_release(X) __atomic_op_return{RELEASE}(X,+,1)
+atomic_fetch_inc(X) __atomic_fetch_op{MB}(X,+,1)
+atomic_fetch_inc_relaxed(X) __atomic_fetch_op{ONCE}(X,+,1)
+atomic_fetch_inc_acquire(X) __atomic_fetch_op{ACQUIRE}(X,+,1)
+atomic_fetch_inc_release(X) __atomic_fetch_op{RELEASE}(X,+,1)
+
+atomic_sub_return(V,X) __atomic_op_return{MB}(X,-,V)
+atomic_sub_return_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_op_return{ONCE}(X,-,V)
+atomic_sub_return_acquire(V,X) __atomic_op_return{ACQUIRE}(X,-,V)
+atomic_sub_return_release(V,X) __atomic_op_return{RELEASE}(X,-,V)
+atomic_fetch_sub(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{MB}(X,-,V)
+atomic_fetch_sub_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{ONCE}(X,-,V)
+atomic_fetch_sub_acquire(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{ACQUIRE}(X,-,V)
+atomic_fetch_sub_release(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{RELEASE}(X,-,V)
+
+atomic_dec_return(X) __atomic_op_return{MB}(X,-,1)
+atomic_dec_return_relaxed(X) __atomic_op_return{ONCE}(X,-,1)
+atomic_dec_return_acquire(X) __atomic_op_return{ACQUIRE}(X,-,1)
+atomic_dec_return_release(X) __atomic_op_return{RELEASE}(X,-,1)
+atomic_fetch_dec(X) __atomic_fetch_op{MB}(X,-,1)
+atomic_fetch_dec_relaxed(X) __atomic_fetch_op{ONCE}(X,-,1)
+atomic_fetch_dec_acquire(X) __atomic_fetch_op{ACQUIRE}(X,-,1)
+atomic_fetch_dec_release(X) __atomic_fetch_op{RELEASE}(X,-,1)
+
+atomic_xchg(X,V) __xchg{MB}(X,V)
+atomic_xchg_relaxed(X,V) __xchg{ONCE}(X,V)
+atomic_xchg_release(X,V) __xchg{RELEASE}(X,V)
+atomic_xchg_acquire(X,V) __xchg{ACQUIRE}(X,V)
+atomic_cmpxchg(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{MB}(X,V,W)
+atomic_cmpxchg_relaxed(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{ONCE}(X,V,W)
+atomic_cmpxchg_acquire(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{ACQUIRE}(X,V,W)
+atomic_cmpxchg_release(X,V,W) __cmpxchg{RELEASE}(X,V,W)
+
+atomic_sub_and_test(V,X) __atomic_op_return{MB}(X,-,V) == 0
+atomic_dec_and_test(X)  __atomic_op_return{MB}(X,-,1) == 0
+atomic_inc_and_test(X)  __atomic_op_return{MB}(X,+,1) == 0
+atomic_add_negative(V,X) __atomic_op_return{MB}(X,+,V) < 0
+atomic_add_negative_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_op_return{ONCE}(X,+,V) < 0
+atomic_add_negative_acquire(V,X) __atomic_op_return{ACQUIRE}(X,+,V) < 0
+atomic_add_negative_release(V,X) __atomic_op_return{RELEASE}(X,+,V) < 0
+
+atomic_fetch_andnot(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{MB}(X,&~,V)
+atomic_fetch_andnot_acquire(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{ACQUIRE}(X,&~,V)
+atomic_fetch_andnot_release(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{RELEASE}(X,&~,V)
+atomic_fetch_andnot_relaxed(V,X) __atomic_fetch_op{ONCE}(X,&~,V)
-- 
2.34.1
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] tools/memory-model: Distinguish between syntactic and semantic tags
Posted by Alan Stern 1 year, 8 months ago
On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 05:22:53PM +0200, Jonas Oberhauser wrote:
> Not all tags that are always there syntactically also provide semantic
> membership in the corresponding set. For example, an 'acquire tag on a
> write does not imply that the write is finally in the Acquire set and
> provides acquire ordering.
> 
> To distinguish in those cases between the syntactic tags and actual
> sets, we capitalize the former, so 'ACQUIRE tags may be present on both
> reads and writes, but only reads will appear in the Acquire set.
> 
> For tags where the two concepts are the same we do not use specific
> capitalization to make this distinction.
> 
> Reported-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jonas Oberhauser <jonas.oberhauser@huaweicloud.com>
> ---
>  tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.bell |  22 ++--
>  tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.def  | 176 +++++++++++++--------------
>  2 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.bell b/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.bell
> index 08fa1ccb1328..045d94a8eabf 100644
> --- a/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.bell
> +++ b/tools/memory-model/linux-kernel.bell
> @@ -13,18 +13,18 @@
>  
>  "Linux-kernel memory consistency model"
>  
> -enum Accesses = 'once (*READ_ONCE,WRITE_ONCE*) ||
> -		'release (*smp_store_release*) ||
> -		'acquire (*smp_load_acquire*) ||
> -		'noreturn (* R of non-return RMW *) ||
> -		'mb (*xchg(),compare_exchange(),...*)
> +enum Accesses = 'ONCE (*READ_ONCE,WRITE_ONCE*) ||
> +		'RELEASE (*smp_store_release*) ||
> +		'ACQUIRE (*smp_load_acquire*) ||
> +		'NORETURN (* R of non-return RMW *) ||
> +		'MB (*xchg(),compare_exchange(),...*)
>  instructions R[Accesses]
>  instructions W[Accesses]
>  instructions RMW[Accesses]
>  
>  enum Barriers = 'wmb (*smp_wmb*) ||
>  		'rmb (*smp_rmb*) ||
> -		'mb (*smp_mb*) ||
> +		'MB (*smp_mb*) ||
>  		'barrier (*barrier*) ||
>  		'rcu-lock (*rcu_read_lock*)  ||
>  		'rcu-unlock (*rcu_read_unlock*) ||
> @@ -38,10 +38,10 @@ instructions F[Barriers]
>  
>  (* Remove impossible tags, such as Acquire on a store or failed RMW *)
>  let FailedRMW = RMW \ (domain(rmw) | range(rmw))
> -let Acquire = Acquire \ W \ FailedRMW
> -let Release = Release \ R \ FailedRMW
> -let Mb = Mb \ FailedRMW
> -let Noreturn = Noreturn \ W
> +let Acquire = ACQUIRE \ W \ FailedRMW
> +let Release = RELEASE \ R \ FailedRMW
> +let Mb = MB \ FailedRMW
> +let Noreturn = NORETURN \ W
>  
>  (* SRCU *)
>  enum SRCU = 'srcu-lock || 'srcu-unlock || 'sync-srcu
> @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ flag ~empty rcu-rscs & (po ; [Sync-srcu] ; po) as invalid-sleep
>  flag ~empty different-values(srcu-rscs) as srcu-bad-value-match
>  
>  (* Compute marked and plain memory accesses *)
> -let Marked = (~M) | IW | Once | Release | Acquire | domain(rmw) | range(rmw) |
> +let Marked = (~M) | IW | ONCE | RELEASE | ACQUIRE | MB | domain(rmw) | range(rmw) |

The new MB term isn't needed, because MB tags on memory accesses are 
filtered out unless the access also belongs to domain(rmw) | range(rmw).

Alan
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] tools/memory-model: Distinguish between syntactic and semantic tags
Posted by Jonas Oberhauser 1 year, 8 months ago
>> +let Mb = MB \ FailedRMW
>> >>   (* Compute marked and plain memory accesses *)
>> -let Marked = (~M) | IW | Once | Release | Acquire | domain(rmw) | range(rmw) |
>> +let Marked = (~M) | IW | ONCE | RELEASE | ACQUIRE | MB | domain(rmw) | range(rmw) |
> 
> The new MB term isn't needed, because MB tags on memory accesses are
> filtered out unless the access also belongs to domain(rmw) | range(rmw).
> 
> Alan


Thanks for all the notes.
I think on this one is needed though under the assumption that herd7 
would no longer know internally to replace the MB with ONCE in case
of failure.


best wishes,

   jonas
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] tools/memory-model: Distinguish between syntactic and semantic tags
Posted by Alan Stern 1 year, 8 months ago
On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 02:49:38PM +0200, Jonas Oberhauser wrote:
> > > +let Mb = MB \ FailedRMW
> > > >>   (* Compute marked and plain memory accesses *)
> > > -let Marked = (~M) | IW | Once | Release | Acquire | domain(rmw) | range(rmw) |
> > > +let Marked = (~M) | IW | ONCE | RELEASE | ACQUIRE | MB | domain(rmw) | range(rmw) |
> > 
> > The new MB term isn't needed, because MB tags on memory accesses are
> > filtered out unless the access also belongs to domain(rmw) | range(rmw).
> > 
> > Alan
> 
> 
> Thanks for all the notes.
> I think on this one is needed though under the assumption that herd7 would
> no longer know internally to replace the MB with ONCE in case
> of failure.

And I was wrong because failed RMW instructions are filtered out of Mb, 
not out of MB.

Hmmm, this raises another question: Shouldn't the R event for a failed 
cmpxchg_release count as marked?  At the moment it's not clear how such 
events will be tagged.  Perhaps the best thing to do is add RMW to 
this list, which would make domain(rmw) and range(rmw) unnecessary.

And then we probably don't need to keep MB -- unless smp_store_mb()'s 
definition ever gets reduced to __store{MB}(X,V).

Alan
Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/4] tools/memory-model: Distinguish between syntactic and semantic tags
Posted by Jonas Oberhauser 1 year, 8 months ago

Am 5/28/2024 um 4:01 PM schrieb Alan Stern:
> On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 02:49:38PM +0200, Jonas Oberhauser wrote:
>>>> +let Mb = MB \ FailedRMW
>>>>>>    (* Compute marked and plain memory accesses *)
>>>> -let Marked = (~M) | IW | Once | Release | Acquire | domain(rmw) | range(rmw) |
>>>> +let Marked = (~M) | IW | ONCE | RELEASE | ACQUIRE | MB | domain(rmw) | range(rmw) |
>>>
>>> The new MB term isn't needed, because MB tags on memory accesses are
>>> filtered out unless the access also belongs to domain(rmw) | range(rmw).
>>>
>>> Alan
>>
>>
>> Thanks for all the notes.
>> I think on this one is needed though under the assumption that herd7 would
>> no longer know internally to replace the MB with ONCE in case
>> of failure.

> Hmmm, this raises another question: Shouldn't the R event for a failed
> cmpxchg_release count as marked?  

Yes.

> At the moment it's not clear how such
> events will be tagged.

If by "at the moment" you mean the current herd7, then (as mentioned in 
the cover letter) this patch does not work at all with the current herd7 
because IIUC in fact ACQUIRE and RELEASE tags will be replaced by Once 
in all cases (so smp_store_release would be a store Once ...).

However, in a hypothetical version of herd7 which just leaves all the 
syntactic tags intact, we would get R & RMW & RELEASE, which would not 
be in the Release set (by nature of failing and being a read) but would 
be Marked (by nature of having a syntactic RELEASE tag).

> Perhaps the best thing to do is add RMW to
> this list, which would make domain(rmw) and range(rmw) unnecessary.


That's also a good idea.

> And then we probably don't need to keep MB

That's correct, although as a failsafe I would probably keep it anyways 
- it doesn't harm, but it may prevent a gotcha.

Have fun,
   jonas