On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:12:11PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 06:02:34PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:

quoted

Thanks for having a go at this. I tried defining something axiomatically,
but got stuck pretty quickly. In my scheme, I used "data-directed
transitivity" instead of "local transitivity", since the latter seems to
be a bit of a misnomer.

I figured that "local" meant local to the CPUs participating in the
release-acquire chain.  As opposed to smp_mb() chains where the ordering
is "global" as in visible to all CPUs, whether on the chain or not.
Does that help?

That is in fact how I read and understood it.