All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hp.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com>,
	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
	"linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Stefan Bader <stefan.bader@canonical.com>,
	Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	mcgrof@do-not-panic.com,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/6] arch: unify ioremap prototypes and macro aliases
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2015 17:43:25 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1436485405.3214.99.camel@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150709014020.GA7021@wotan.suse.de>

On Thu, 2015-07-09 at 03:40 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 05:10:58PM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-07-07 at 18:07 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 11:13:30AM +0100, Russell King - ARM 
> > > Linux 
> > > wrote:
> >   :
> > > > On ARM, we (probably) have a lot of cases where ioremap() is 
> > > > used 
> > > > multiple
> > > > times for the same physical address space, so we shouldn't rule 
> > > > out 
> > > > having
> > > > multiple mappings of the same type.
> > > 
> > > Why is that done? Don't worry if you are not sure why but only 
> > > speculate of the
> > > practice's existence (sloppy drivers or lazy driver developers). 
> > > FWIW 
> > > for x86
> > > IIRC I ended up concluding that overlapping ioremap() calls with 
> > > the 
> > > same type
> > > would work but not if they differ in type.  Although I haven't 
> > > written a
> > > grammer rule to hunt down overlapping ioremap() I suspected its 
> > > use 
> > > was likely
> > > odd and likely should be reconsidered. Would this be true for ARM 
> > > too 
> > > ? Or are
> > > you saying this should be a feature ? I don't expect an answer 
> > > now 
> > > but I'm
> > > saying we *should* all together decide on this, and if you're 
> > > inclined to
> > > believe that this should ideally be avoided I'd like to hear 
> > > that. If 
> > > you feel
> > > strongly though this should be a feature I would like to know 
> > > why.
> > 
> > There are multiple mapping interfaces, and overlapping can happen 
> > among
> > them as well.  For instance, remap_pfn_range() (and 
> > io_remap_pfn_range(), which is the same as remap_pfn_range() on 
> > x86)
> > creates a mapping to user space. The same physical ranges may be
> > mapped to kernel and user spaces.  /dev/mem is one example that may
> > create a user space mapping to a physical address that is already
> > mapped with ioremap() by other module.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback. The restriction seems to be differing cache 
> types
> requirements, other than this, are there any other concerns ? For 
> instance are
> we completley happy with aliasing so long as cache types match 
> everywhere?  I'd
> expect no architecture would want cache types to differ when 
> aliasing, what
> should differ then I think would just be how to verify this and it 
> doesn't seem
> we may be doing this for all architectures.
> 
> Even for userspace we seem to be covered -- we enable userspace 
> mmap() calls to
> get their mapped space with a cache type, on the kernel we'd say use
> pgprot_writecombine() on the vma->vm_page_prot prior to the
> io_remap_pfn_range() -- that maps to remap_pfn_range() on x86 and as 
> you note
> that checks cache type via reserve_memtype() -- but only on x86...
> 
> Other than this differing cache type concern are we OK with aliasing 
> in
> userspace all the time ?
> 
> If we want to restrict aliasing either for the kernel or userspace 
> mapping
> we might be able to do it, I just want to know if we want to or not 
> care
> at all.

Yes, we allow to create multiple mappings to a same physical page as
long as their cache type is the same.  There are multiple use-cases
that depend on this ability.

> > pmem and DAX also create mappings to the same NVDIMM ranges.  DAX 
> > calls
> > vm_insert_mixed(), which is particularly a problematic since
> > vm_insert_mixed() does not verify aliasing.  ioremap() and 
> > remap_pfn_range()
> > call reserve_memtype() to verify aliasing on x86. 
> >  reserve_memtype() is
> > x86-specific and there is no arch-generic wrapper for such check.
> 
> As clarified by Matthew Wilcox via commit d92576f1167cacf7844 ("dax: 
> does not
> work correctly with virtual aliasing caches") caches are virtually 
> mapped for
> some architectures, it seems it should be possible to fix this for 
> DAX somehow
> though.

I simply described this DAX case as an example of how two modules might
request different cache types.  Yes, we should be able to fix this
case.

> > I think DAX could get a cache type from pmem to keep them in sync, 
> > though.
> 
> pmem is x86 specific right now, are other folks going to expose 
> something
> similar ? Otherwise we seem to only be addressing these deep concerns 
> for
> x86 so far.

pmem is a generic driver and is not x86-specific. 

Thanks,
-Toshi

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hp.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com>,
	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
	"linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Stefan Bader <stefan.bader@canonical.com>,
	Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	mcgrof@do-not-panic.com,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/6] arch: unify ioremap prototypes and macro aliases
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2015 17:43:25 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1436485405.3214.99.camel@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150709014020.GA7021@wotan.suse.de>

On Thu, 2015-07-09 at 03:40 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 05:10:58PM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-07-07 at 18:07 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 11:13:30AM +0100, Russell King - ARM 
> > > Linux 
> > > wrote:
> >   :
> > > > On ARM, we (probably) have a lot of cases where ioremap() is 
> > > > used 
> > > > multiple
> > > > times for the same physical address space, so we shouldn't rule 
> > > > out 
> > > > having
> > > > multiple mappings of the same type.
> > > 
> > > Why is that done? Don't worry if you are not sure why but only 
> > > speculate of the
> > > practice's existence (sloppy drivers or lazy driver developers). 
> > > FWIW 
> > > for x86
> > > IIRC I ended up concluding that overlapping ioremap() calls with 
> > > the 
> > > same type
> > > would work but not if they differ in type.  Although I haven't 
> > > written a
> > > grammer rule to hunt down overlapping ioremap() I suspected its 
> > > use 
> > > was likely
> > > odd and likely should be reconsidered. Would this be true for ARM 
> > > too 
> > > ? Or are
> > > you saying this should be a feature ? I don't expect an answer 
> > > now 
> > > but I'm
> > > saying we *should* all together decide on this, and if you're 
> > > inclined to
> > > believe that this should ideally be avoided I'd like to hear 
> > > that. If 
> > > you feel
> > > strongly though this should be a feature I would like to know 
> > > why.
> > 
> > There are multiple mapping interfaces, and overlapping can happen 
> > among
> > them as well.  For instance, remap_pfn_range() (and 
> > io_remap_pfn_range(), which is the same as remap_pfn_range() on 
> > x86)
> > creates a mapping to user space. The same physical ranges may be
> > mapped to kernel and user spaces.  /dev/mem is one example that may
> > create a user space mapping to a physical address that is already
> > mapped with ioremap() by other module.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback. The restriction seems to be differing cache 
> types
> requirements, other than this, are there any other concerns ? For 
> instance are
> we completley happy with aliasing so long as cache types match 
> everywhere?  I'd
> expect no architecture would want cache types to differ when 
> aliasing, what
> should differ then I think would just be how to verify this and it 
> doesn't seem
> we may be doing this for all architectures.
> 
> Even for userspace we seem to be covered -- we enable userspace 
> mmap() calls to
> get their mapped space with a cache type, on the kernel we'd say use
> pgprot_writecombine() on the vma->vm_page_prot prior to the
> io_remap_pfn_range() -- that maps to remap_pfn_range() on x86 and as 
> you note
> that checks cache type via reserve_memtype() -- but only on x86...
> 
> Other than this differing cache type concern are we OK with aliasing 
> in
> userspace all the time ?
> 
> If we want to restrict aliasing either for the kernel or userspace 
> mapping
> we might be able to do it, I just want to know if we want to or not 
> care
> at all.

Yes, we allow to create multiple mappings to a same physical page as
long as their cache type is the same.  There are multiple use-cases
that depend on this ability.

> > pmem and DAX also create mappings to the same NVDIMM ranges.  DAX 
> > calls
> > vm_insert_mixed(), which is particularly a problematic since
> > vm_insert_mixed() does not verify aliasing.  ioremap() and 
> > remap_pfn_range()
> > call reserve_memtype() to verify aliasing on x86. 
> >  reserve_memtype() is
> > x86-specific and there is no arch-generic wrapper for such check.
> 
> As clarified by Matthew Wilcox via commit d92576f1167cacf7844 ("dax: 
> does not
> work correctly with virtual aliasing caches") caches are virtually 
> mapped for
> some architectures, it seems it should be possible to fix this for 
> DAX somehow
> though.

I simply described this DAX case as an example of how two modules might
request different cache types.  Yes, we should be able to fix this
case.

> > I think DAX could get a cache type from pmem to keep them in sync, 
> > though.
> 
> pmem is x86 specific right now, are other folks going to expose 
> something
> similar ? Otherwise we seem to only be addressing these deep concerns 
> for
> x86 so far.

pmem is a generic driver and is not x86-specific. 

Thanks,
-Toshi

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: toshi.kani@hp.com (Toshi Kani)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v5 2/6] arch: unify ioremap prototypes and macro aliases
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2015 17:43:25 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1436485405.3214.99.camel@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150709014020.GA7021@wotan.suse.de>

On Thu, 2015-07-09 at 03:40 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 05:10:58PM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-07-07 at 18:07 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 11:13:30AM +0100, Russell King - ARM 
> > > Linux 
> > > wrote:
> >   :
> > > > On ARM, we (probably) have a lot of cases where ioremap() is 
> > > > used 
> > > > multiple
> > > > times for the same physical address space, so we shouldn't rule 
> > > > out 
> > > > having
> > > > multiple mappings of the same type.
> > > 
> > > Why is that done? Don't worry if you are not sure why but only 
> > > speculate of the
> > > practice's existence (sloppy drivers or lazy driver developers). 
> > > FWIW 
> > > for x86
> > > IIRC I ended up concluding that overlapping ioremap() calls with 
> > > the 
> > > same type
> > > would work but not if they differ in type.  Although I haven't 
> > > written a
> > > grammer rule to hunt down overlapping ioremap() I suspected its 
> > > use 
> > > was likely
> > > odd and likely should be reconsidered. Would this be true for ARM 
> > > too 
> > > ? Or are
> > > you saying this should be a feature ? I don't expect an answer 
> > > now 
> > > but I'm
> > > saying we *should* all together decide on this, and if you're 
> > > inclined to
> > > believe that this should ideally be avoided I'd like to hear 
> > > that. If 
> > > you feel
> > > strongly though this should be a feature I would like to know 
> > > why.
> > 
> > There are multiple mapping interfaces, and overlapping can happen 
> > among
> > them as well.  For instance, remap_pfn_range() (and 
> > io_remap_pfn_range(), which is the same as remap_pfn_range() on 
> > x86)
> > creates a mapping to user space. The same physical ranges may be
> > mapped to kernel and user spaces.  /dev/mem is one example that may
> > create a user space mapping to a physical address that is already
> > mapped with ioremap() by other module.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback. The restriction seems to be differing cache 
> types
> requirements, other than this, are there any other concerns ? For 
> instance are
> we completley happy with aliasing so long as cache types match 
> everywhere?  I'd
> expect no architecture would want cache types to differ when 
> aliasing, what
> should differ then I think would just be how to verify this and it 
> doesn't seem
> we may be doing this for all architectures.
> 
> Even for userspace we seem to be covered -- we enable userspace 
> mmap() calls to
> get their mapped space with a cache type, on the kernel we'd say use
> pgprot_writecombine() on the vma->vm_page_prot prior to the
> io_remap_pfn_range() -- that maps to remap_pfn_range() on x86 and as 
> you note
> that checks cache type via reserve_memtype() -- but only on x86...
> 
> Other than this differing cache type concern are we OK with aliasing 
> in
> userspace all the time ?
> 
> If we want to restrict aliasing either for the kernel or userspace 
> mapping
> we might be able to do it, I just want to know if we want to or not 
> care
> at all.

Yes, we allow to create multiple mappings to a same physical page as
long as their cache type is the same.  There are multiple use-cases
that depend on this ability.

> > pmem and DAX also create mappings to the same NVDIMM ranges.  DAX 
> > calls
> > vm_insert_mixed(), which is particularly a problematic since
> > vm_insert_mixed() does not verify aliasing.  ioremap() and 
> > remap_pfn_range()
> > call reserve_memtype() to verify aliasing on x86. 
> >  reserve_memtype() is
> > x86-specific and there is no arch-generic wrapper for such check.
> 
> As clarified by Matthew Wilcox via commit d92576f1167cacf7844 ("dax: 
> does not
> work correctly with virtual aliasing caches") caches are virtually 
> mapped for
> some architectures, it seems it should be possible to fix this for 
> DAX somehow
> though.

I simply described this DAX case as an example of how two modules might
request different cache types.  Yes, we should be able to fix this
case.

> > I think DAX could get a cache type from pmem to keep them in sync, 
> > though.
> 
> pmem is x86 specific right now, are other folks going to expose 
> something
> similar ? Otherwise we seem to only be addressing these deep concerns 
> for
> x86 so far.

pmem is a generic driver and is not x86-specific. 

Thanks,
-Toshi

  reply	other threads:[~2015-07-09 23:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 85+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-06-22  8:24 [PATCH v5 0/6] pmem api, generic ioremap_cache, and memremap Dan Williams
2015-06-22  8:24 ` Dan Williams
2015-06-22  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 1/6] arch, drivers: don't include <asm/io.h> directly, use <linux/io.h> instead Dan Williams
2015-06-22  8:24   ` Dan Williams
2015-06-22 16:01   ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-22 16:01     ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-22  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 2/6] arch: unify ioremap prototypes and macro aliases Dan Williams
2015-06-22  8:24   ` Dan Williams
2015-06-22 16:10   ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-22 16:10     ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-22 17:12     ` Dan Williams
2015-06-22 17:12       ` Dan Williams
2015-06-23 10:07       ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-23 10:07         ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-23 15:04         ` Dan Williams
2015-06-23 15:04           ` Dan Williams
2015-06-24 12:24           ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-24 12:24             ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-30 22:57     ` Dan Williams
2015-06-30 22:57       ` Dan Williams
2015-06-30 22:57       ` Dan Williams
2015-07-01  6:23       ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-07-01  6:23         ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-07-01  6:23         ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-07-01  6:55         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-01  6:55           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-01  6:55           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-01  6:59           ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-07-01  6:59             ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-07-01  6:59             ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-07-01  7:19             ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-01  7:19               ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-01  7:19               ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-01  7:28               ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-07-01  7:28                 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-07-01  7:28                 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-07-07  9:50                 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-07  9:50                   ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-07  9:50                   ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-07 10:13                   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-07-07 10:13                     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-07-07 10:13                     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-07-07 10:27                     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-07 10:27                       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-07 10:27                       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-07-07 16:07                     ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-07 16:07                       ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-07 16:07                       ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-07 23:10                       ` Toshi Kani
2015-07-07 23:10                         ` Toshi Kani
2015-07-07 23:10                         ` Toshi Kani
2015-07-09  1:40                         ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-09  1:40                           ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-09  1:40                           ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-09 23:43                           ` Toshi Kani [this message]
2015-07-09 23:43                             ` Toshi Kani
2015-07-09 23:43                             ` Toshi Kani
2015-07-01  8:09           ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-07-01  8:09             ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-07-01  8:09             ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-07-01 16:47             ` Dan Williams
2015-07-01 16:47               ` Dan Williams
2015-07-01 16:47               ` Dan Williams
2015-07-09 18:54   ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-09 18:54     ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-06-22  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 3/6] cleanup IORESOURCE_CACHEABLE vs ioremap() Dan Williams
2015-06-22  8:24   ` Dan Williams
2015-06-22  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 4/6] devm: fix ioremap_cache() usage Dan Williams
2015-06-22  8:24   ` Dan Williams
2015-06-22  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 5/6] arch: introduce memremap_cache() and memremap_wt() Dan Williams
2015-06-22  8:24   ` Dan Williams
2015-06-22  8:24 ` [PATCH v5 6/6] arch, x86: pmem api for ensuring durability of persistent memory updates Dan Williams
2015-06-22  8:24   ` Dan Williams
2015-06-22 16:17   ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-22 16:17     ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-22 17:51     ` Dan Williams
2015-06-22 17:51       ` Dan Williams
2015-06-23 10:09       ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-23 10:09         ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-23 10:39     ` Richard Weinberger
2015-06-23 10:39       ` Richard Weinberger
2015-06-24 12:08       ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-24 12:08         ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-06-24 12:35         ` Richard Weinberger
2015-06-24 12:35           ` Richard Weinberger

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=1436485405.3214.99.camel@hp.com \
    --to=toshi.kani@hp.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=hmh@hmh.eng.br \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
    --cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=matthew.r.wilcox@intel.com \
    --cc=mcgrof@do-not-panic.com \
    --cc=mcgrof@suse.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=stefan.bader@canonical.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@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: link
Be 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.