154 lines
		
	
	
		
			5.7 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Plaintext
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			154 lines
		
	
	
		
			5.7 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			Plaintext
		
	
	
	
	
	
This directory contains the following litmus tests:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
CoRR+poonceonce+Once.litmus
 | 
						|
	Test of read-read coherence, that is, whether or not two
 | 
						|
	successive reads from the same variable are ordered.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
CoRW+poonceonce+Once.litmus
 | 
						|
	Test of read-write coherence, that is, whether or not a read
 | 
						|
	from a given variable followed by a write to that same variable
 | 
						|
	are ordered.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
CoWR+poonceonce+Once.litmus
 | 
						|
	Test of write-read coherence, that is, whether or not a write
 | 
						|
	to a given variable followed by a read from that same variable
 | 
						|
	are ordered.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
CoWW+poonceonce.litmus
 | 
						|
	Test of write-write coherence, that is, whether or not two
 | 
						|
	successive writes to the same variable are ordered.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
IRIW+fencembonceonces+OnceOnce.litmus
 | 
						|
	Test of independent reads from independent writes with smp_mb()
 | 
						|
	between each pairs of reads.  In other words, is smp_mb()
 | 
						|
	sufficient to cause two different reading processes to agree on
 | 
						|
	the order of a pair of writes, where each write is to a different
 | 
						|
	variable by a different process?  This litmus test is forbidden
 | 
						|
	by LKMM's propagation rule.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
IRIW+poonceonces+OnceOnce.litmus
 | 
						|
	Test of independent reads from independent writes with nothing
 | 
						|
	between each pairs of reads.  In other words, is anything at all
 | 
						|
	needed to cause two different reading processes to agree on the
 | 
						|
	order of a pair of writes, where each write is to a different
 | 
						|
	variable by a different process?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus
 | 
						|
	Tests whether the ordering provided by a lock-protected S
 | 
						|
	litmus test is visible to an external process whose accesses are
 | 
						|
	separated by smp_mb().	This addition of an external process to
 | 
						|
	S is otherwise known as ISA2.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
ISA2+poonceonces.litmus
 | 
						|
	As below, but with store-release replaced with WRITE_ONCE()
 | 
						|
	and load-acquire replaced with READ_ONCE().
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
ISA2+pooncerelease+poacquirerelease+poacquireonce.litmus
 | 
						|
	Can a release-acquire chain order a prior store against
 | 
						|
	a later load?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
LB+fencembonceonce+ctrlonceonce.litmus
 | 
						|
	Does a control dependency and an smp_mb() suffice for the
 | 
						|
	load-buffering litmus test, where each process reads from one
 | 
						|
	of two variables then writes to the other?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
LB+poacquireonce+pooncerelease.litmus
 | 
						|
	Does a release-acquire pair suffice for the load-buffering
 | 
						|
	litmus test, where each process reads from one of two variables then
 | 
						|
	writes to the other?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
LB+poonceonces.litmus
 | 
						|
	As above, but with store-release replaced with WRITE_ONCE()
 | 
						|
	and load-acquire replaced with READ_ONCE().
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
MP+onceassign+derefonce.litmus
 | 
						|
	As below, but with rcu_assign_pointer() and an rcu_dereference().
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
MP+polockmbonce+poacquiresilsil.litmus
 | 
						|
	Protect the access with a lock and an smp_mb__after_spinlock()
 | 
						|
	in one process, and use an acquire load followed by a pair of
 | 
						|
	spin_is_locked() calls in the other process.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
MP+polockonce+poacquiresilsil.litmus
 | 
						|
	Protect the access with a lock in one process, and use an
 | 
						|
	acquire load followed by a pair of spin_is_locked() calls
 | 
						|
	in the other process.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
MP+polocks.litmus
 | 
						|
	As below, but with the second access of the writer process
 | 
						|
	and the first access of reader process protected by a lock.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
MP+poonceonces.litmus
 | 
						|
	As below, but without the smp_rmb() and smp_wmb().
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
MP+pooncerelease+poacquireonce.litmus
 | 
						|
	As below, but with a release-acquire chain.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
MP+porevlocks.litmus
 | 
						|
	As below, but with the first access of the writer process
 | 
						|
	and the second access of reader process protected by a lock.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
MP+fencewmbonceonce+fencermbonceonce.litmus
 | 
						|
	Does a smp_wmb() (between the stores) and an smp_rmb() (between
 | 
						|
	the loads) suffice for the message-passing litmus test, where one
 | 
						|
	process writes data and then a flag, and the other process reads
 | 
						|
	the flag and then the data.  (This is similar to the ISA2 tests,
 | 
						|
	but with two processes instead of three.)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
R+fencembonceonces.litmus
 | 
						|
	This is the fully ordered (via smp_mb()) version of one of
 | 
						|
	the classic counterintuitive litmus tests that illustrates the
 | 
						|
	effects of store propagation delays.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
R+poonceonces.litmus
 | 
						|
	As above, but without the smp_mb() invocations.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
SB+fencembonceonces.litmus
 | 
						|
	This is the fully ordered (again, via smp_mb() version of store
 | 
						|
	buffering, which forms the core of Dekker's mutual-exclusion
 | 
						|
	algorithm.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
SB+poonceonces.litmus
 | 
						|
	As above, but without the smp_mb() invocations.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
SB+rfionceonce-poonceonces.litmus
 | 
						|
	This litmus test demonstrates that LKMM is not fully multicopy
 | 
						|
	atomic.  (Neither is it other multicopy atomic.)  This litmus test
 | 
						|
	also demonstrates the "locations" debugging aid, which designates
 | 
						|
	additional registers and locations to be printed out in the dump
 | 
						|
	of final states in the herd7 output.  Without the "locations"
 | 
						|
	statement, only those registers and locations mentioned in the
 | 
						|
	"exists" clause will be printed.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
S+poonceonces.litmus
 | 
						|
	As below, but without the smp_wmb() and acquire load.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
S+fencewmbonceonce+poacquireonce.litmus
 | 
						|
	Can a smp_wmb(), instead of a release, and an acquire order
 | 
						|
	a prior store against a subsequent store?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
WRC+poonceonces+Once.litmus
 | 
						|
WRC+pooncerelease+fencermbonceonce+Once.litmus
 | 
						|
	These two are members of an extension of the MP litmus-test
 | 
						|
	class in which the first write is moved to a separate process.
 | 
						|
	The second is forbidden because smp_store_release() is
 | 
						|
	A-cumulative in LKMM.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Z6.0+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus
 | 
						|
	Is the ordering provided by a spin_unlock() and a subsequent
 | 
						|
	spin_lock() sufficient to make ordering apparent to accesses
 | 
						|
	by a process not holding the lock?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Z6.0+pooncelock+poonceLock+pombonce.litmus
 | 
						|
	As above, but with smp_mb__after_spinlock() immediately
 | 
						|
	following the spin_lock().
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Z6.0+pooncerelease+poacquirerelease+fencembonceonce.litmus
 | 
						|
	Is the ordering provided by a release-acquire chain sufficient
 | 
						|
	to make ordering apparent to accesses by a process that does
 | 
						|
	not participate in that release-acquire chain?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
A great many more litmus tests are available here:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
	https://github.com/paulmckrcu/litmus
 |