From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
Haibo Xu <Haibo.Xu@arm.com>, Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 4/8] KVM: arm64: Introduce MTE VM feature
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2021 10:01:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210604090125.GA23321@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210603160031.GE20338@arm.com>
On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 05:00:31PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:45:09AM +0100, Steven Price wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > index c5d1f3c87dbd..226035cf7d6c 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > @@ -822,6 +822,42 @@ transparent_hugepage_adjust(struct kvm_memory_slot *memslot,
> > return PAGE_SIZE;
> > }
> >
> > +static int sanitise_mte_tags(struct kvm *kvm, kvm_pfn_t pfn,
> > + unsigned long size)
> > +{
> > + if (kvm_has_mte(kvm)) {
> > + /*
> > + * The page will be mapped in stage 2 as Normal Cacheable, so
> > + * the VM will be able to see the page's tags and therefore
> > + * they must be initialised first. If PG_mte_tagged is set,
> > + * tags have already been initialised.
> > + * pfn_to_online_page() is used to reject ZONE_DEVICE pages
> > + * that may not support tags.
> > + */
> > + unsigned long i, nr_pages = size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > + struct page *page = pfn_to_online_page(pfn);
> > +
> > + if (!page)
> > + return -EFAULT;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++, page++) {
> > + /*
> > + * There is a potential (but very unlikely) race
> > + * between two VMs which are sharing a physical page
> > + * entering this at the same time. However by splitting
> > + * the test/set the only risk is tags being overwritten
> > + * by the mte_clear_page_tags() call.
> > + */
>
> And I think the real risk here is when the page is writable by at least
> one of the VMs sharing the page. This excludes KSM, so it only leaves
> the MAP_SHARED mappings.
>
> > + if (!test_bit(PG_mte_tagged, &page->flags)) {
> > + mte_clear_page_tags(page_address(page));
> > + set_bit(PG_mte_tagged, &page->flags);
> > + }
> > + }
>
> If we want to cover this race (I'd say in a separate patch), we can call
> mte_sync_page_tags(page, __pte(0), false, true) directly (hopefully I
> got the arguments right). We can avoid the big lock in most cases if
> kvm_arch_prepare_memory_region() sets a VM_MTE_RESET (tag clear etc.)
> and __alloc_zeroed_user_highpage() clears the tags on allocation (as we
> do for VM_MTE but the new flag would not affect the stage 1 VMM page
> attributes).
Another idea: if VM_SHARED is found for any vma within a region in
kvm_arch_prepare_memory_region(), we either prevent the enabling of MTE
for the guest or reject the memory slot if MTE was already enabled.
An alternative here would be to clear VM_MTE_ALLOWED so that any
subsequent mprotect(PROT_MTE) in the VMM would fail in
arch_validate_flags(). MTE would still be allowed in the guest but in
the VMM for the guest memory regions. We can probably do this
irrespective of VM_SHARED. Of course, the VMM can still mmap() the
memory initially with PROT_MTE but that's not an issue IIRC, only the
concurrent mprotect().
--
Catalin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>, Haibo Xu <Haibo.Xu@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 4/8] KVM: arm64: Introduce MTE VM feature
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2021 10:01:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210604090125.GA23321@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210603160031.GE20338@arm.com>
On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 05:00:31PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:45:09AM +0100, Steven Price wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > index c5d1f3c87dbd..226035cf7d6c 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > @@ -822,6 +822,42 @@ transparent_hugepage_adjust(struct kvm_memory_slot *memslot,
> > return PAGE_SIZE;
> > }
> >
> > +static int sanitise_mte_tags(struct kvm *kvm, kvm_pfn_t pfn,
> > + unsigned long size)
> > +{
> > + if (kvm_has_mte(kvm)) {
> > + /*
> > + * The page will be mapped in stage 2 as Normal Cacheable, so
> > + * the VM will be able to see the page's tags and therefore
> > + * they must be initialised first. If PG_mte_tagged is set,
> > + * tags have already been initialised.
> > + * pfn_to_online_page() is used to reject ZONE_DEVICE pages
> > + * that may not support tags.
> > + */
> > + unsigned long i, nr_pages = size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > + struct page *page = pfn_to_online_page(pfn);
> > +
> > + if (!page)
> > + return -EFAULT;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++, page++) {
> > + /*
> > + * There is a potential (but very unlikely) race
> > + * between two VMs which are sharing a physical page
> > + * entering this at the same time. However by splitting
> > + * the test/set the only risk is tags being overwritten
> > + * by the mte_clear_page_tags() call.
> > + */
>
> And I think the real risk here is when the page is writable by at least
> one of the VMs sharing the page. This excludes KSM, so it only leaves
> the MAP_SHARED mappings.
>
> > + if (!test_bit(PG_mte_tagged, &page->flags)) {
> > + mte_clear_page_tags(page_address(page));
> > + set_bit(PG_mte_tagged, &page->flags);
> > + }
> > + }
>
> If we want to cover this race (I'd say in a separate patch), we can call
> mte_sync_page_tags(page, __pte(0), false, true) directly (hopefully I
> got the arguments right). We can avoid the big lock in most cases if
> kvm_arch_prepare_memory_region() sets a VM_MTE_RESET (tag clear etc.)
> and __alloc_zeroed_user_highpage() clears the tags on allocation (as we
> do for VM_MTE but the new flag would not affect the stage 1 VMM page
> attributes).
Another idea: if VM_SHARED is found for any vma within a region in
kvm_arch_prepare_memory_region(), we either prevent the enabling of MTE
for the guest or reject the memory slot if MTE was already enabled.
An alternative here would be to clear VM_MTE_ALLOWED so that any
subsequent mprotect(PROT_MTE) in the VMM would fail in
arch_validate_flags(). MTE would still be allowed in the guest but in
the VMM for the guest memory regions. We can probably do this
irrespective of VM_SHARED. Of course, the VMM can still mmap() the
memory initially with PROT_MTE but that's not an issue IIRC, only the
concurrent mprotect().
--
Catalin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 4/8] KVM: arm64: Introduce MTE VM feature
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2021 10:01:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210604090125.GA23321@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210603160031.GE20338@arm.com>
On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 05:00:31PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:45:09AM +0100, Steven Price wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > index c5d1f3c87dbd..226035cf7d6c 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > @@ -822,6 +822,42 @@ transparent_hugepage_adjust(struct kvm_memory_slot *memslot,
> > return PAGE_SIZE;
> > }
> >
> > +static int sanitise_mte_tags(struct kvm *kvm, kvm_pfn_t pfn,
> > + unsigned long size)
> > +{
> > + if (kvm_has_mte(kvm)) {
> > + /*
> > + * The page will be mapped in stage 2 as Normal Cacheable, so
> > + * the VM will be able to see the page's tags and therefore
> > + * they must be initialised first. If PG_mte_tagged is set,
> > + * tags have already been initialised.
> > + * pfn_to_online_page() is used to reject ZONE_DEVICE pages
> > + * that may not support tags.
> > + */
> > + unsigned long i, nr_pages = size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > + struct page *page = pfn_to_online_page(pfn);
> > +
> > + if (!page)
> > + return -EFAULT;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++, page++) {
> > + /*
> > + * There is a potential (but very unlikely) race
> > + * between two VMs which are sharing a physical page
> > + * entering this at the same time. However by splitting
> > + * the test/set the only risk is tags being overwritten
> > + * by the mte_clear_page_tags() call.
> > + */
>
> And I think the real risk here is when the page is writable by at least
> one of the VMs sharing the page. This excludes KSM, so it only leaves
> the MAP_SHARED mappings.
>
> > + if (!test_bit(PG_mte_tagged, &page->flags)) {
> > + mte_clear_page_tags(page_address(page));
> > + set_bit(PG_mte_tagged, &page->flags);
> > + }
> > + }
>
> If we want to cover this race (I'd say in a separate patch), we can call
> mte_sync_page_tags(page, __pte(0), false, true) directly (hopefully I
> got the arguments right). We can avoid the big lock in most cases if
> kvm_arch_prepare_memory_region() sets a VM_MTE_RESET (tag clear etc.)
> and __alloc_zeroed_user_highpage() clears the tags on allocation (as we
> do for VM_MTE but the new flag would not affect the stage 1 VMM page
> attributes).
Another idea: if VM_SHARED is found for any vma within a region in
kvm_arch_prepare_memory_region(), we either prevent the enabling of MTE
for the guest or reject the memory slot if MTE was already enabled.
An alternative here would be to clear VM_MTE_ALLOWED so that any
subsequent mprotect(PROT_MTE) in the VMM would fail in
arch_validate_flags(). MTE would still be allowed in the guest but in
the VMM for the guest memory regions. We can probably do this
irrespective of VM_SHARED. Of course, the VMM can still mmap() the
memory initially with PROT_MTE but that's not an issue IIRC, only the
concurrent mprotect().
--
Catalin
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
Haibo Xu <Haibo.Xu@arm.com>, Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 4/8] KVM: arm64: Introduce MTE VM feature
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2021 10:01:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210604090125.GA23321@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210603160031.GE20338@arm.com>
On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 05:00:31PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 11:45:09AM +0100, Steven Price wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > index c5d1f3c87dbd..226035cf7d6c 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> > @@ -822,6 +822,42 @@ transparent_hugepage_adjust(struct kvm_memory_slot *memslot,
> > return PAGE_SIZE;
> > }
> >
> > +static int sanitise_mte_tags(struct kvm *kvm, kvm_pfn_t pfn,
> > + unsigned long size)
> > +{
> > + if (kvm_has_mte(kvm)) {
> > + /*
> > + * The page will be mapped in stage 2 as Normal Cacheable, so
> > + * the VM will be able to see the page's tags and therefore
> > + * they must be initialised first. If PG_mte_tagged is set,
> > + * tags have already been initialised.
> > + * pfn_to_online_page() is used to reject ZONE_DEVICE pages
> > + * that may not support tags.
> > + */
> > + unsigned long i, nr_pages = size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > + struct page *page = pfn_to_online_page(pfn);
> > +
> > + if (!page)
> > + return -EFAULT;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++, page++) {
> > + /*
> > + * There is a potential (but very unlikely) race
> > + * between two VMs which are sharing a physical page
> > + * entering this at the same time. However by splitting
> > + * the test/set the only risk is tags being overwritten
> > + * by the mte_clear_page_tags() call.
> > + */
>
> And I think the real risk here is when the page is writable by at least
> one of the VMs sharing the page. This excludes KSM, so it only leaves
> the MAP_SHARED mappings.
>
> > + if (!test_bit(PG_mte_tagged, &page->flags)) {
> > + mte_clear_page_tags(page_address(page));
> > + set_bit(PG_mte_tagged, &page->flags);
> > + }
> > + }
>
> If we want to cover this race (I'd say in a separate patch), we can call
> mte_sync_page_tags(page, __pte(0), false, true) directly (hopefully I
> got the arguments right). We can avoid the big lock in most cases if
> kvm_arch_prepare_memory_region() sets a VM_MTE_RESET (tag clear etc.)
> and __alloc_zeroed_user_highpage() clears the tags on allocation (as we
> do for VM_MTE but the new flag would not affect the stage 1 VMM page
> attributes).
Another idea: if VM_SHARED is found for any vma within a region in
kvm_arch_prepare_memory_region(), we either prevent the enabling of MTE
for the guest or reject the memory slot if MTE was already enabled.
An alternative here would be to clear VM_MTE_ALLOWED so that any
subsequent mprotect(PROT_MTE) in the VMM would fail in
arch_validate_flags(). MTE would still be allowed in the guest but in
the VMM for the guest memory regions. We can probably do this
irrespective of VM_SHARED. Of course, the VMM can still mmap() the
memory initially with PROT_MTE but that's not an issue IIRC, only the
concurrent mprotect().
--
Catalin
_______________________________________________
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:[~2021-06-04 9:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 92+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-24 10:45 [PATCH v13 0/8] MTE support for KVM guest Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` [PATCH v13 1/8] arm64: mte: Handle race when synchronising tags Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` [PATCH v13 2/8] arm64: Handle MTE tags zeroing in __alloc_zeroed_user_highpage() Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` [PATCH v13 3/8] arm64: mte: Sync tags for pages where PTE is untagged Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-06-03 14:20 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 14:20 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 14:20 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 14:20 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-24 10:45 ` [PATCH v13 4/8] KVM: arm64: Introduce MTE VM feature Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-06-03 16:00 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 16:00 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 16:00 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 16:00 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 9:01 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2021-06-04 9:01 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 9:01 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 9:01 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 10:42 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 10:42 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 10:42 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 10:42 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 11:36 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 11:36 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 11:36 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 11:36 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 12:51 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 12:51 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 12:51 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 12:51 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 14:05 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 14:05 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 14:05 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 14:05 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-24 10:45 ` [PATCH v13 5/8] KVM: arm64: Save/restore MTE registers Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-06-03 16:48 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 16:48 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 16:48 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 16:48 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-24 10:45 ` [PATCH v13 6/8] KVM: arm64: Expose KVM_ARM_CAP_MTE Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-06-03 16:58 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 16:58 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 16:58 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 16:58 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-24 10:45 ` [PATCH v13 7/8] KVM: arm64: ioctl to fetch/store tags in a guest Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-06-03 17:13 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 17:13 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 17:13 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-03 17:13 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 11:15 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 11:15 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 11:15 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 11:15 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 11:42 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 11:42 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 11:42 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 11:42 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 13:09 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 13:09 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 13:09 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 13:09 ` Steven Price
2021-06-04 15:34 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 15:34 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 15:34 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-04 15:34 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-05-24 10:45 ` [PATCH v13 8/8] KVM: arm64: Document MTE capability and ioctl Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
2021-05-24 10:45 ` Steven Price
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=20210604090125.GA23321@arm.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=Haibo.Xu@arm.com \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=drjones@redhat.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=quintela@redhat.com \
--cc=richard.henderson@linaro.org \
--cc=steven.price@arm.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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: 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.