From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>,
alpha <linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>,
Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com>,
linux-um <linux-um@lists.infradead.org>,
Brian Cain <bcain@codeaurora.org>,
linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
linux-m68k <linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 00/13] preempt: Make preempt count unconditional
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 09:24:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87een35woz.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wir6LZ=4gHt8VDdASv=TmEMjEUONuzbt=s+DyXPCvxaBA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Sep 14 2020 at 23:39, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 11:24 PM Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:
>> > But another reason I tried to avoid kmap_atomic() is that it disables
>> > preemption unconditionally, even on 64-bit architectures where HIGHMEM
>> > is irrelevant. So using kmap_atomic() here means that the bulk of
>> > WireGuard packet encryption runs with preemption disabled, essentially
>> > for legacy reasons.
>>
>> Agreed. We should definitely fix that.
>
> Well, honestly, one big reason for that is debugging.
>
> The *semantics* of the kmap_atomic() is in the name - you can't sleep
> in between it and the kunmap_atomic().
>
> On any sane architecture, kmap_atomic() ends up being a no-op from an
> implementation standpoint, and sleeping would work just fine.
>
> But we very much want to make sure that people don't then write code
> that doesn't work on the bad old 32-bit machines where it really needs
> that sequence to be safe from preemption.
Alternatively we just make highmem a bit more expensive by making these
maps preemptible. RT is doing this for a long time and it's not that
horrible.
The approach is to keep track about the number of active maps in a task
and on an eventual context switch save them away in the task struct and
restore them when the task is scheduled back in.
Thanks,
tglx
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Brian Cain <bcain@codeaurora.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>,
linux-um <linux-um@lists.infradead.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k <linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
alpha <linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [patch 00/13] preempt: Make preempt count unconditional
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 09:24:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87een35woz.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wir6LZ=4gHt8VDdASv=TmEMjEUONuzbt=s+DyXPCvxaBA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Sep 14 2020 at 23:39, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 11:24 PM Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:
>> > But another reason I tried to avoid kmap_atomic() is that it disables
>> > preemption unconditionally, even on 64-bit architectures where HIGHMEM
>> > is irrelevant. So using kmap_atomic() here means that the bulk of
>> > WireGuard packet encryption runs with preemption disabled, essentially
>> > for legacy reasons.
>>
>> Agreed. We should definitely fix that.
>
> Well, honestly, one big reason for that is debugging.
>
> The *semantics* of the kmap_atomic() is in the name - you can't sleep
> in between it and the kunmap_atomic().
>
> On any sane architecture, kmap_atomic() ends up being a no-op from an
> implementation standpoint, and sleeping would work just fine.
>
> But we very much want to make sure that people don't then write code
> that doesn't work on the bad old 32-bit machines where it really needs
> that sequence to be safe from preemption.
Alternatively we just make highmem a bit more expensive by making these
maps preemptible. RT is doing this for a long time and it's not that
horrible.
The approach is to keep track about the number of active maps in a task
and on an eventual context switch save them away in the task struct and
restore them when the task is scheduled back in.
Thanks,
tglx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Brian Cain <bcain@codeaurora.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
linux-xtensa@li
Subject: Re: [patch 00/13] preempt: Make preempt count unconditional
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 09:24:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87een35woz.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wir6LZ=4gHt8VDdASv=TmEMjEUONuzbt=s+DyXPCvxaBA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Sep 14 2020 at 23:39, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 11:24 PM Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:
>> > But another reason I tried to avoid kmap_atomic() is that it disables
>> > preemption unconditionally, even on 64-bit architectures where HIGHMEM
>> > is irrelevant. So using kmap_atomic() here means that the bulk of
>> > WireGuard packet encryption runs with preemption disabled, essentially
>> > for legacy reasons.
>>
>> Agreed. We should definitely fix that.
>
> Well, honestly, one big reason for that is debugging.
>
> The *semantics* of the kmap_atomic() is in the name - you can't sleep
> in between it and the kunmap_atomic().
>
> On any sane architecture, kmap_atomic() ends up being a no-op from an
> implementation standpoint, and sleeping would work just fine.
>
> But we very much want to make sure that people don't then write code
> that doesn't work on the bad old 32-bit machines where it really needs
> that sequence to be safe from preemption.
Alternatively we just make highmem a bit more expensive by making these
maps preemptible. RT is doing this for a long time and it's not that
horrible.
The approach is to keep track about the number of active maps in a task
and on an eventual context switch save them away in the task struct and
restore them when the task is scheduled back in.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-15 7:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 282+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-14 20:42 [patch 00/13] preempt: Make preempt count unconditional Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [patch 01/13] lib/debug: Remove pointless ARCH_NO_PREEMPT dependencies Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [patch 02/13] preempt: Make preempt count unconditional Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [patch 03/13] preempt: Clenaup PREEMPT_COUNT leftovers Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-16 10:56 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-09-16 10:56 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-09-16 10:56 ` [Intel-gfx] " Valentin Schneider
2020-09-16 10:56 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [patch 04/13] lockdep: " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 16:11 ` Will Deacon
2020-09-15 16:11 ` Will Deacon
2020-09-15 16:11 ` [Intel-gfx] " Will Deacon
2020-09-15 16:11 ` Will Deacon
2020-09-15 16:11 ` Will Deacon
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [patch 05/13] mm/pagemap: " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 0:52 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-15 0:52 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-15 2:40 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-15 5:28 ` kernel test robot
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [patch 06/13] locking/bitspinlock: " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 16:10 ` Will Deacon
2020-09-15 16:10 ` Will Deacon
2020-09-15 16:10 ` [Intel-gfx] " Will Deacon
2020-09-15 16:10 ` Will Deacon
2020-09-15 16:10 ` Will Deacon
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [patch 07/13] uaccess: " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [patch 08/13] sched: " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-16 10:56 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-09-16 10:56 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-09-16 10:56 ` [Intel-gfx] " Valentin Schneider
2020-09-16 10:56 ` Valentin Schneider
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [patch 09/13] ARM: " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [patch 10/13] xtensa: " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [patch 11/13] drm/i915: " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [patch 12/13] rcutorture: " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [patch 13/13] preempt: Remove PREEMPT_COUNT from Kconfig Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 20:54 ` [patch 00/13] preempt: Make preempt count unconditional Steven Rostedt
2020-09-14 20:54 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-09-14 20:54 ` [Intel-gfx] " Steven Rostedt
2020-09-14 20:54 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-09-14 20:54 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-09-14 20:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-14 20:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-14 20:59 ` [Intel-gfx] " Linus Torvalds
2020-09-14 20:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-14 20:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-14 21:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 21:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 21:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 21:55 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 21:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 21:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-14 22:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-14 22:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-14 22:24 ` [Intel-gfx] " Linus Torvalds
2020-09-14 22:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-14 22:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-14 22:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-14 22:37 ` [Intel-gfx] " Linus Torvalds
2020-09-14 22:37 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 3:21 ` [PATCH] crypto: lib/chacha20poly1305 - Set SG_MITER_ATOMIC unconditionally Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 3:21 ` Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 3:21 ` Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 3:21 ` [Intel-gfx] " Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 3:21 ` Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 3:30 ` Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 6:03 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-15 6:40 ` Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 6:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 6:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 7:05 ` Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 7:10 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-15 9:34 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 10:02 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-15 10:05 ` Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 10:08 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-15 10:10 ` Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 19:04 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 7:08 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-15 6:20 ` [patch 00/13] preempt: Make preempt count unconditional Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-15 6:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-15 6:20 ` [Intel-gfx] " Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-15 6:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-15 6:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-15 6:22 ` Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 6:22 ` Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 6:22 ` Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 6:22 ` [Intel-gfx] " Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 6:22 ` Herbert Xu
2020-09-15 6:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 6:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 6:39 ` [Intel-gfx] " Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 6:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 6:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 7:24 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2020-09-15 7:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 7:24 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 17:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 17:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 17:29 ` [Intel-gfx] " Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 17:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 17:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 8:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 8:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 8:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 8:39 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 8:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 17:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 17:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 17:35 ` [Intel-gfx] " Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 17:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 17:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-15 19:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 19:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 19:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 19:57 ` [Intel-gfx] " Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 19:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-15 19:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-09-16 18:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-16 18:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-16 18:34 ` [Intel-gfx] " Linus Torvalds
2020-09-16 18:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-16 18:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-16 7:37 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 7:37 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 7:37 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 7:37 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 7:37 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 15:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 15:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 15:29 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 15:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 15:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 18:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-16 18:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-16 18:32 ` [Intel-gfx] " Linus Torvalds
2020-09-16 18:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-16 18:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2020-09-16 20:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 20:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 20:43 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 20:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 20:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-17 6:38 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-17 6:38 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-17 6:38 ` [Intel-gfx] " Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-17 6:38 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-17 6:38 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-09-16 20:29 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 20:29 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 20:29 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 20:29 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 20:29 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 20:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 20:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 20:58 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 20:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 20:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 21:43 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 21:43 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 21:43 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 21:43 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 21:43 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-16 22:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 22:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 22:39 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 22:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 22:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-17 7:52 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-17 7:52 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-17 7:52 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2020-09-17 7:52 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-17 7:52 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-17 16:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-17 16:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-17 16:28 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-17 16:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-17 16:28 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-29 8:19 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:23 ` [Intel-gfx] " Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:23 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:23 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:23 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:21 ` [Intel-gfx] " Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:21 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:21 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:21 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:20 ` [Intel-gfx] " Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:20 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:20 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:20 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:19 ` [Intel-gfx] " Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:19 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:19 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:19 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:19 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:19 ` [Intel-gfx] " Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:19 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 8:19 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 9:00 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-29 9:00 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-29 9:00 ` [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2020-09-29 9:00 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-29 9:00 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-09-29 14:54 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 14:54 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 14:54 ` [Intel-gfx] " Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 14:54 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-29 14:54 ` Michal Hocko
2020-09-16 19:23 ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-09-16 19:23 ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-09-16 19:23 ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Wilcox
2020-09-16 19:23 ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-09-16 19:23 ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-09-16 20:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 20:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 20:48 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 20:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-16 20:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-15 17:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-15 17:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-15 17:25 ` [Intel-gfx] " Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-15 17:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-15 17:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-15 17:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2020-09-14 22:01 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for " Patchwork
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=87een35woz.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=airlied@linux.ie \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=bcain@codeaurora.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=chris@zankel.net \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jcmvbkbc@gmail.com \
--cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-um@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mattst88@gmail.com \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--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: 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.