From: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com> To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>, Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, kernel-team@android.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 11/21] sched: Split the guts of sched_setaffinity() into a helper function Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 17:41:01 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20210521164101.lwq5wr4mbb32co6l@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210518094725.7701-12-will@kernel.org> On 05/18/21 10:47, Will Deacon wrote: > In preparation for replaying user affinity requests using a saved mask, > split sched_setaffinity() up so that the initial task lookup and > security checks are only performed when the request is coming directly > from userspace. > > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> > --- > kernel/sched/core.c | 110 +++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------- > 1 file changed, 58 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c > index 9512623d5a60..808bbe669a6d 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c > @@ -6788,9 +6788,61 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(sched_getattr, pid_t, pid, struct sched_attr __user *, uattr, > return retval; > } > > -long sched_setaffinity(pid_t pid, const struct cpumask *in_mask) > +static int > +__sched_setaffinity(struct task_struct *p, const struct cpumask *mask) > { > + int retval; > cpumask_var_t cpus_allowed, new_mask; > + > + if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&cpus_allowed, GFP_KERNEL)) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&new_mask, GFP_KERNEL)) > + return -ENOMEM; Shouldn't we free cpus_allowed first? Cheers -- Qais Yousef > + > + cpuset_cpus_allowed(p, cpus_allowed); > + cpumask_and(new_mask, mask, cpus_allowed); > + > + /* > + * Since bandwidth control happens on root_domain basis, > + * if admission test is enabled, we only admit -deadline > + * tasks allowed to run on all the CPUs in the task's > + * root_domain. > + */ > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > + if (task_has_dl_policy(p) && dl_bandwidth_enabled()) { > + rcu_read_lock(); > + if (!cpumask_subset(task_rq(p)->rd->span, new_mask)) { > + retval = -EBUSY; > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + goto out_free_masks; > + } > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + } > +#endif > +again: > + retval = __set_cpus_allowed_ptr(p, new_mask, SCA_CHECK); > + if (retval) > + goto out_free_masks; > + > + cpuset_cpus_allowed(p, cpus_allowed); > + if (!cpumask_subset(new_mask, cpus_allowed)) { > + /* > + * We must have raced with a concurrent cpuset update. > + * Just reset the cpumask to the cpuset's cpus_allowed. > + */ > + cpumask_copy(new_mask, cpus_allowed); > + goto again; > + } > + > +out_free_masks: > + free_cpumask_var(new_mask); > + free_cpumask_var(cpus_allowed); > + return retval; > +} > + > +long sched_setaffinity(pid_t pid, const struct cpumask *in_mask) > +{ > struct task_struct *p; > int retval; > > @@ -6810,68 +6862,22 @@ long sched_setaffinity(pid_t pid, const struct cpumask *in_mask) > retval = -EINVAL; > goto out_put_task; > } > - if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&cpus_allowed, GFP_KERNEL)) { > - retval = -ENOMEM; > - goto out_put_task; > - } > - if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&new_mask, GFP_KERNEL)) { > - retval = -ENOMEM; > - goto out_free_cpus_allowed; > - } > - retval = -EPERM; > + > if (!check_same_owner(p)) { > rcu_read_lock(); > if (!ns_capable(__task_cred(p)->user_ns, CAP_SYS_NICE)) { > rcu_read_unlock(); > - goto out_free_new_mask; > + retval = -EPERM; > + goto out_put_task; > } > rcu_read_unlock(); > } > > retval = security_task_setscheduler(p); > if (retval) > - goto out_free_new_mask; > - > - > - cpuset_cpus_allowed(p, cpus_allowed); > - cpumask_and(new_mask, in_mask, cpus_allowed); > - > - /* > - * Since bandwidth control happens on root_domain basis, > - * if admission test is enabled, we only admit -deadline > - * tasks allowed to run on all the CPUs in the task's > - * root_domain. > - */ > -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > - if (task_has_dl_policy(p) && dl_bandwidth_enabled()) { > - rcu_read_lock(); > - if (!cpumask_subset(task_rq(p)->rd->span, new_mask)) { > - retval = -EBUSY; > - rcu_read_unlock(); > - goto out_free_new_mask; > - } > - rcu_read_unlock(); > - } > -#endif > -again: > - retval = __set_cpus_allowed_ptr(p, new_mask, SCA_CHECK); > + goto out_put_task; > > - if (!retval) { > - cpuset_cpus_allowed(p, cpus_allowed); > - if (!cpumask_subset(new_mask, cpus_allowed)) { > - /* > - * We must have raced with a concurrent cpuset > - * update. Just reset the cpus_allowed to the > - * cpuset's cpus_allowed > - */ > - cpumask_copy(new_mask, cpus_allowed); > - goto again; > - } > - } > -out_free_new_mask: > - free_cpumask_var(new_mask); > -out_free_cpus_allowed: > - free_cpumask_var(cpus_allowed); > + retval = __sched_setaffinity(p, in_mask); > out_put_task: > put_task_struct(p); > return retval; > -- > 2.31.1.751.gd2f1c929bd-goog >
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com> To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>, Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, kernel-team@android.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 11/21] sched: Split the guts of sched_setaffinity() into a helper function Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 17:41:01 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20210521164101.lwq5wr4mbb32co6l@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210518094725.7701-12-will@kernel.org> On 05/18/21 10:47, Will Deacon wrote: > In preparation for replaying user affinity requests using a saved mask, > split sched_setaffinity() up so that the initial task lookup and > security checks are only performed when the request is coming directly > from userspace. > > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> > --- > kernel/sched/core.c | 110 +++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------- > 1 file changed, 58 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c > index 9512623d5a60..808bbe669a6d 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c > @@ -6788,9 +6788,61 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(sched_getattr, pid_t, pid, struct sched_attr __user *, uattr, > return retval; > } > > -long sched_setaffinity(pid_t pid, const struct cpumask *in_mask) > +static int > +__sched_setaffinity(struct task_struct *p, const struct cpumask *mask) > { > + int retval; > cpumask_var_t cpus_allowed, new_mask; > + > + if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&cpus_allowed, GFP_KERNEL)) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&new_mask, GFP_KERNEL)) > + return -ENOMEM; Shouldn't we free cpus_allowed first? Cheers -- Qais Yousef > + > + cpuset_cpus_allowed(p, cpus_allowed); > + cpumask_and(new_mask, mask, cpus_allowed); > + > + /* > + * Since bandwidth control happens on root_domain basis, > + * if admission test is enabled, we only admit -deadline > + * tasks allowed to run on all the CPUs in the task's > + * root_domain. > + */ > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > + if (task_has_dl_policy(p) && dl_bandwidth_enabled()) { > + rcu_read_lock(); > + if (!cpumask_subset(task_rq(p)->rd->span, new_mask)) { > + retval = -EBUSY; > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + goto out_free_masks; > + } > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + } > +#endif > +again: > + retval = __set_cpus_allowed_ptr(p, new_mask, SCA_CHECK); > + if (retval) > + goto out_free_masks; > + > + cpuset_cpus_allowed(p, cpus_allowed); > + if (!cpumask_subset(new_mask, cpus_allowed)) { > + /* > + * We must have raced with a concurrent cpuset update. > + * Just reset the cpumask to the cpuset's cpus_allowed. > + */ > + cpumask_copy(new_mask, cpus_allowed); > + goto again; > + } > + > +out_free_masks: > + free_cpumask_var(new_mask); > + free_cpumask_var(cpus_allowed); > + return retval; > +} > + > +long sched_setaffinity(pid_t pid, const struct cpumask *in_mask) > +{ > struct task_struct *p; > int retval; > > @@ -6810,68 +6862,22 @@ long sched_setaffinity(pid_t pid, const struct cpumask *in_mask) > retval = -EINVAL; > goto out_put_task; > } > - if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&cpus_allowed, GFP_KERNEL)) { > - retval = -ENOMEM; > - goto out_put_task; > - } > - if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&new_mask, GFP_KERNEL)) { > - retval = -ENOMEM; > - goto out_free_cpus_allowed; > - } > - retval = -EPERM; > + > if (!check_same_owner(p)) { > rcu_read_lock(); > if (!ns_capable(__task_cred(p)->user_ns, CAP_SYS_NICE)) { > rcu_read_unlock(); > - goto out_free_new_mask; > + retval = -EPERM; > + goto out_put_task; > } > rcu_read_unlock(); > } > > retval = security_task_setscheduler(p); > if (retval) > - goto out_free_new_mask; > - > - > - cpuset_cpus_allowed(p, cpus_allowed); > - cpumask_and(new_mask, in_mask, cpus_allowed); > - > - /* > - * Since bandwidth control happens on root_domain basis, > - * if admission test is enabled, we only admit -deadline > - * tasks allowed to run on all the CPUs in the task's > - * root_domain. > - */ > -#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > - if (task_has_dl_policy(p) && dl_bandwidth_enabled()) { > - rcu_read_lock(); > - if (!cpumask_subset(task_rq(p)->rd->span, new_mask)) { > - retval = -EBUSY; > - rcu_read_unlock(); > - goto out_free_new_mask; > - } > - rcu_read_unlock(); > - } > -#endif > -again: > - retval = __set_cpus_allowed_ptr(p, new_mask, SCA_CHECK); > + goto out_put_task; > > - if (!retval) { > - cpuset_cpus_allowed(p, cpus_allowed); > - if (!cpumask_subset(new_mask, cpus_allowed)) { > - /* > - * We must have raced with a concurrent cpuset > - * update. Just reset the cpus_allowed to the > - * cpuset's cpus_allowed > - */ > - cpumask_copy(new_mask, cpus_allowed); > - goto again; > - } > - } > -out_free_new_mask: > - free_cpumask_var(new_mask); > -out_free_cpus_allowed: > - free_cpumask_var(cpus_allowed); > + retval = __sched_setaffinity(p, in_mask); > out_put_task: > put_task_struct(p); > return retval; > -- > 2.31.1.751.gd2f1c929bd-goog > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-21 16:41 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 166+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-05-18 9:47 [PATCH v6 00/21] Add support for 32-bit tasks on asymmetric AArch32 systems Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 01/21] arm64: cpuinfo: Split AArch32 registers out into a separate struct Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 10:47 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-21 10:47 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 02/21] arm64: Allow mismatched 32-bit EL0 support Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 10:25 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-21 10:25 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-24 12:05 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 12:05 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 13:49 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-24 13:49 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-21 10:41 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-21 10:41 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-24 12:09 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 12:09 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 13:46 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-24 13:46 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-21 15:22 ` Qais Yousef 2021-05-21 15:22 ` Qais Yousef 2021-05-24 20:21 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 20:21 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 03/21] KVM: arm64: Kill 32-bit vCPUs on systems with mismatched " Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 10:47 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-21 10:47 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 04/21] arm64: Kill 32-bit applications scheduled on 64-bit-only CPUs Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 10:55 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-21 10:55 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 05/21] arm64: Advertise CPUs capable of running 32-bit applications in sysfs Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 11:00 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-21 11:00 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 06/21] sched: Introduce task_cpu_possible_mask() to limit fallback rq selection Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 16:03 ` Peter Zijlstra 2021-05-21 16:03 ` Peter Zijlstra 2021-05-24 12:17 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 12:17 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 07/21] cpuset: Don't use the cpu_possible_mask as a last resort for cgroup v1 Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 17:39 ` Qais Yousef 2021-05-21 17:39 ` Qais Yousef 2021-05-24 20:21 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 20:21 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 08/21] cpuset: Honour task_cpu_possible_mask() in guarantee_online_cpus() Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 16:25 ` Qais Yousef 2021-05-21 16:25 ` Qais Yousef 2021-05-24 21:09 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 21:09 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 09/21] sched: Reject CPU affinity changes based on task_cpu_possible_mask() Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 10/21] sched: Introduce task_struct::user_cpus_ptr to track requested affinity Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 11/21] sched: Split the guts of sched_setaffinity() into a helper function Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 16:41 ` Qais Yousef [this message] 2021-05-21 16:41 ` Qais Yousef 2021-05-24 21:16 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 21:16 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 12/21] sched: Allow task CPU affinity to be restricted on asymmetric systems Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 17:11 ` Qais Yousef 2021-05-21 17:11 ` Qais Yousef 2021-05-24 21:43 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 21:43 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 13/21] sched: Admit forcefully-affined tasks into SCHED_DEADLINE Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 10:20 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-18 10:20 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-18 10:28 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 10:28 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 10:48 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-18 10:48 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-18 10:59 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 10:59 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 13:19 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-18 13:19 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-20 9:13 ` Juri Lelli 2021-05-20 9:13 ` Juri Lelli 2021-05-20 10:16 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-20 10:16 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-20 10:33 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-20 10:33 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-20 12:38 ` Juri Lelli 2021-05-20 12:38 ` Juri Lelli 2021-05-20 12:38 ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira 2021-05-20 12:38 ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira 2021-05-20 15:06 ` Dietmar Eggemann 2021-05-20 15:06 ` Dietmar Eggemann 2021-05-20 16:00 ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira 2021-05-20 16:00 ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira 2021-05-20 17:55 ` Dietmar Eggemann 2021-05-20 17:55 ` Dietmar Eggemann 2021-05-20 18:03 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-20 18:03 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 11:26 ` Dietmar Eggemann 2021-05-21 11:26 ` Dietmar Eggemann 2021-05-20 18:01 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-20 18:01 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 5:25 ` Juri Lelli 2021-05-21 5:25 ` Juri Lelli 2021-05-21 8:15 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-21 8:15 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-21 8:39 ` Juri Lelli 2021-05-21 8:39 ` Juri Lelli 2021-05-21 10:37 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 10:37 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 11:23 ` Dietmar Eggemann 2021-05-21 11:23 ` Dietmar Eggemann 2021-05-21 13:02 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-21 13:02 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-21 14:04 ` Juri Lelli 2021-05-21 14:04 ` Juri Lelli 2021-05-21 17:47 ` Dietmar Eggemann 2021-05-21 17:47 ` Dietmar Eggemann 2021-05-21 13:00 ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira 2021-05-21 13:00 ` Daniel Bristot de Oliveira 2021-05-21 13:12 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-21 13:12 ` Quentin Perret 2021-05-24 20:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 20:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 14/21] freezer: Add frozen_or_skipped() helper function Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 15/21] sched: Defer wakeup in ttwu() for unschedulable frozen tasks Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 16/21] arm64: Implement task_cpu_possible_mask() Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 14:57 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-24 14:57 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 17/21] arm64: exec: Adjust affinity for compat tasks with mismatched 32-bit EL0 Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 15:02 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-24 15:02 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 18/21] arm64: Prevent offlining first CPU with 32-bit EL0 on mismatched system Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 15:46 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-24 15:46 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-24 20:32 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 20:32 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-25 9:43 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-25 9:43 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 19/21] arm64: Hook up cmdline parameter to allow mismatched 32-bit EL0 Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 15:47 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-24 15:47 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 20/21] arm64: Remove logic to kill 32-bit tasks on 64-bit-only cores Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 15:47 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-24 15:47 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-18 9:47 ` [PATCH v6 21/21] Documentation: arm64: describe asymmetric 32-bit support Will Deacon 2021-05-18 9:47 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-21 17:37 ` Qais Yousef 2021-05-21 17:37 ` Qais Yousef 2021-05-24 21:46 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 21:46 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 16:22 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-24 16:22 ` Catalin Marinas 2021-05-21 17:45 ` [PATCH v6 00/21] Add support for 32-bit tasks on asymmetric AArch32 systems Qais Yousef 2021-05-21 17:45 ` Qais Yousef 2021-05-24 22:08 ` Will Deacon 2021-05-24 22:08 ` Will Deacon
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20210521164101.lwq5wr4mbb32co6l@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com \ --to=qais.yousef@arm.com \ --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \ --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \ --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \ --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \ --cc=kernel-team@android.com \ --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=lizefan@huawei.com \ --cc=maz@kernel.org \ --cc=mingo@redhat.com \ --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \ --cc=peterz@infradead.org \ --cc=qperret@google.com \ --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \ --cc=surenb@google.com \ --cc=tj@kernel.org \ --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \ --cc=will@kernel.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.