| 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+mbonceonces+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? |
| |
| 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+ctrlonceonce+mbonceonce.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+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+wmbonceonce+rmbonceonce.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+mbonceonces.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+mbonceonces.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. |
| |
| S+poonceonces.litmus |
| As below, but without the smp_wmb() and acquire load. |
| |
| S+wmbonceonce+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+rmbonceonce+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. |
| |
| 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+mbonceonce.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 |