Searched refs:ordering (Results 1 – 25 of 141) sorted by relevance
123456
| /linux-6.1.9/Documentation/core-api/ |
| D | refcount-vs-atomic.rst | 14 ``atomic_*()`` functions with regards to the memory ordering guarantees.
17 these memory ordering guarantees.
23 memory ordering in general and for atomic operations specifically.
25 Relevant types of memory ordering
29 ordering types that are relevant for the atomics and reference
33 In the absence of any memory ordering guarantees (i.e. fully unordered)
41 A strong (full) memory ordering guarantees that all prior loads and
49 A RELEASE memory ordering guarantees that all prior loads and
57 An ACQUIRE memory ordering guarantees that all post loads and
84 Memory ordering guarantee changes:
[all …]
|
| /linux-6.1.9/tools/memory-model/Documentation/ |
| D | ordering.txt | 1 This document gives an overview of the categories of memory-ordering
8 This section lists LKMM's three top-level categories of memory-ordering
20 3. Unordered accesses, as the name indicates, have no ordering
23 some of these "unordered" operations provide limited ordering
38 b. Read-modify-write (RMW) ordering augmentation barriers.
50 ordering primitives provided for that purpose. For example, instead of
58 The Linux-kernel primitives that provide full ordering include:
79 memory-ordering primitives. It is surprisingly hard to remember their
82 Second, some RMW atomic operations provide full ordering. These
87 as cmpxchg() are only guaranteed to provide ordering when they succeed.
[all …]
|
| D | control-dependencies.txt | 12 Therefore, a load-load control dependency will not preserve ordering
19 This is not guaranteed to provide any ordering because some types of CPUs
31 However, stores are not speculated. This means that ordering is
40 of ordering. But please note that neither the READ_ONCE() nor the
59 It is tempting to try use control dependencies to enforce ordering on
78 WRITE_ONCE(b, 1); /* BUG: No ordering vs. load from a!!! */
91 have been applied. Therefore, if you need ordering in this example,
92 you must use explicit memory ordering, for example, smp_store_release():
103 Without explicit memory ordering, control-dependency-based ordering is
121 preserve ordering. For example:
[all …]
|
| D | simple.txt | 2 memory-ordering lives simple, as is necessary for those whose domain
3 is complex. After all, there are bugs other than memory-ordering bugs,
4 and the time spent gaining memory-ordering knowledge is not available
139 memory ordering.
175 2. Operations that did not return a value and provided no ordering,
178 3. Operations that returned a value and provided full ordering, such as
180 value-returning operations provide full ordering only conditionally.
181 For example, cmpxchg() provides ordering only upon success.
184 provide full ordering. These are flagged with either a _relaxed()
185 suffix (providing no ordering), or an _acquire() or _release() suffix
[all …]
|
| D | README | 16 that the Linux kernel provides: ordering.txt
64 ordering.txt
65 Overview of the Linux kernel's low-level memory-ordering
69 Common memory-ordering patterns.
|
| D | recipes.txt | 41 your full-ordering warranty, as do undersized accesses that load
157 lock's ordering properties.
208 In the absence of any ordering, this goal may not be met, as can be seen
217 the desired MP ordering. The general approach is shown below:
272 The rcu_assign_pointer() macro has the same ordering properties as does
357 absence of any ordering it is quite possible that this may happen, as
434 The ordering in this example is stronger than it needs to be. For
435 example, ordering would still be preserved if CPU1()'s smp_load_acquire()
468 well as simple and powerful, at least as memory-ordering mechanisms go.
500 of ordering wakeups. The following comment taken from waitqueue_active()
[all …]
|
| D | cheatsheet.txt | 29 Y: Provides ordering
30 a: Provides ordering given intervening RMW atomic operation
|
| /linux-6.1.9/Documentation/RCU/Design/Memory-Ordering/ |
| D | Tree-RCU-Memory-Ordering.rst | 13 grace-period memory ordering guarantee is provided.
18 RCU grace periods provide extremely strong memory-ordering guarantees
49 The workhorse for RCU's grace-period memory ordering is the
72 Tree RCU uses these two ordering guarantees to form an ordering
77 The following litmus test exhibits the ordering effects of these
126 | Because we must provide ordering for RCU's polling grace-period |
145 RCU's grace-period memory ordering guarantee to extend to any
173 might not yet be subject to the grace period's memory ordering.
193 Tree RCU's grace--period memory-ordering guarantees rely most heavily on
197 shown below, which is one of several functions that enforce ordering of
[all …]
|
| /linux-6.1.9/tools/memory-model/litmus-tests/ |
| D | S+poonceonces.litmus | 6 * Starting with a two-process release-acquire chain ordering P0()'s
9 * READ_ONCE(), is ordering preserved?
|
| D | ISA2+poonceonces.litmus | 6 * Given a release-acquire chain ordering the first process's store
7 * against the last process's load, is ordering preserved if all of the
|
| D | README | 39 Tests whether the ordering provided by a lock-protected S
67 Does a unlock+lock pair provides ordering guarantee between a
98 Does a unlock+lock pair provides ordering guarantee between a
148 Is the ordering provided by a spin_unlock() and a subsequent
149 spin_lock() sufficient to make ordering apparent to accesses
157 Is the ordering provided by a release-acquire chain sufficient
158 to make ordering apparent to accesses by a process that does
|
| D | LB+poonceonces.litmus | 7 * be prevented even with no explicit ordering?
|
| D | MP+poonceonces.litmus | 7 * no ordering at all?
|
| D | MP+pooncerelease+poacquireonce.litmus | 7 * smp_load_acquire() provide sufficient ordering for the message-passing
|
| D | SB+poonceonces.litmus | 6 * This litmus test demonstrates that at least some ordering is required
|
| D | MP+fencewmbonceonce+fencermbonceonce.litmus | 7 * sufficient ordering for the message-passing pattern. However, it
|
| D | WRC+poonceonces+Once.litmus | 8 * test has no ordering at all.
|
| D | ISA2+pooncelock+pooncelock+pombonce.litmus | 6 * This test shows that write-write ordering provided by locks
|
| /linux-6.1.9/virt/kvm/ |
| D | Kconfig | 23 # put any explicit constraint on userspace ordering. They can also
31 # to userspace the additional ordering requirements.
|
| /linux-6.1.9/arch/arm/lib/ |
| D | findbit.S | 104 1: eor r3, r2, #0x18 @ big endian byte ordering
122 eor r3, r2, #0x18 @ big endian byte ordering
138 1: eor r3, r2, #0x18 @ big endian byte ordering
156 eor r3, r2, #0x18 @ big endian byte ordering
|
| /linux-6.1.9/Documentation/filesystems/ |
| D | inotify.rst | 50 - There would be no way to get event ordering. Events on file foo and
52 which happened first. A single queue trivially gives you ordering. Such
53 ordering is crucial to existing applications such as Beagle. Imagine
54 "mv a b ; mv b a" events without ordering.
|
| /linux-6.1.9/tools/memory-model/ |
| D | lock.cat | 27 * LKR, LF, RL, and RU are read events; LKR has Acquire ordering.
28 * LKW and UL are write events; UL has Release ordering.
29 * LKW, LF, RL, and RU have no ordering properties.
36 (* Treat RL as a kind of LF: a read with no ordering properties *)
|
| D | linux-kernel.cat | 53 (* Fundamental coherence ordering *)
64 (* Instruction execution ordering *)
90 (* Write and fence propagation ordering *)
152 * expressions of temporal ordering. They could be replaced by
|
| /linux-6.1.9/Documentation/ |
| D | memory-barriers.txt | 87 (*) Assumed minimum execution ordering model.
137 abstract CPU, memory operation ordering is very relaxed, and a CPU may actually
365 ordering over the memory operations on either side of the barrier.
387 A write barrier is a partial ordering on stores only; it is not required
407 An address-dependency barrier is a partial ordering on interdependent
421 showing the ordering constraints.
445 A read barrier is a partial ordering on loads only; it is not required to
462 A general memory barrier is a partial ordering over both loads and stores.
653 of dependency ordering is to -prevent- writes to the data structure, along
656 naturally occurring ordering prevents such records from being lost.
[all …]
|
| /linux-6.1.9/Documentation/driver-api/ |
| D | device_link.rst | 23 suspend/resume and shutdown ordering.
28 types: It guarantees correct suspend/resume and shutdown ordering between a
35 suspend/resume and shutdown ordering is needed, the device link may
83 shutdown ordering) and ``DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME`` to express that runtime PM
204 suspend/resume ordering, this needs to be implemented separately.
208 ordering or a driver presence dependency.
211 device link and does not allow for shutdown ordering or driver presence
245 correct suspend/resume and shutdown ordering between parent and child,
|
123456