All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
To: Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>
Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	"avri.altman@wdc.com" <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
	"alim.akhtar@samsung.com" <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
	"jejb@linux.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
	"bvanassche@acm.org" <bvanassche@acm.org>,
	"beanhuo@micron.com" <beanhuo@micron.com>,
	"asutoshd@codeaurora.org" <asutoshd@codeaurora.org>,
	"matthias.bgg@gmail.com" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	"linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Kuohong Wang (王國鴻)" <kuohong.wang@mediatek.com>,
	"Peter Wang (王信友)" <peter.wang@mediatek.com>,
	"Chun-Hung Wu (巫駿宏)" <Chun-hung.Wu@mediatek.com>,
	"Andy Teng ( ^[$B{}G!9(^[(B)" <Andy.Teng@mediatek.com>,
	"Chaotian Jing (井朝天)" <Chaotian.Jing@mediatek.com>,
	"CC Chou (周志杰)" <cc.chou@mediatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] scsi: ufs: Quiesce all scsi devices before shutdown
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 16:22:53 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1596183773.17247.60.camel@mtkswgap22> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <84510fc12ada0de8284e6a689b7a2358@codeaurora.org>

Hi Can,

On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 15:30 +0800, Can Guo wrote:
> Hi Stanley,
> 
> On 2020-07-24 22:01, Stanley Chu wrote:
> > Currently I/O request could be still submitted to UFS device while
> > UFS is working on shutdown flow. This may lead to racing as below
> > scenarios and finally system may crash due to unclocked register
> > accesses.
> > 
> > To fix this kind of issues, specifically quiesce all SCSI devices
> > before UFS shutdown to block all I/O request sending from block
> > layer.
> > 
> > Example of racing scenario: While UFS device is runtime-suspended
> > 
> > Thread #1: Executing UFS shutdown flow, e.g.,
> >            ufshcd_suspend(UFS_SHUTDOWN_PM)
> > Thread #2: Executing runtime resume flow triggered by I/O request,
> >            e.g., ufshcd_resume(UFS_RUNTIME_PM)
> > 
> 
> I don't quite get it, how can you prevent block layer PM from iniating
> hba runtime resume by quiescing the scsi devices? Block layer PM
> iniates hba async runtime resume in blk_queue_enter(). But quiescing
> the scsi devices can only prevent general I/O requests from passing
> through scsi_queue_rq() callback.
> 
> Say hba is runtime suspended, if an I/O request to sda is sent from
> block layer (sda must be runtime suspended as well at this time),
> blk_queue_enter() initiates async runtime resume for sda. But since
> sda's parents are also runtime suspended, the RPM framework shall do
> runtime resume to the devices in the sequence hba->host->target->sda.
> In this case, ufshcd_resume() still runs concurrently, no?
> 

You are right. This patch can not fix the case you mentioned. It just
prevents "general I/O requests".

So perhaps we also need below patch?

#2 scsi: ufs: Use pm_runtime_get_sync in shutdown flow
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10964097/

The above patch #2 let runtime PM framework manage and prevent
concurrent runtime operations in device driver.

And then using patch #1 (this patch) to block general I/O requests after
ufshcd device is resumed.

Thanks,
Stanley Chu


> Thanks,
> 
> Can Guo.
> 
> > This breaks the assumption that UFS PM flows can not be running
> > concurrently and some unexpected racing behavior may happen.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> > index 9d180da77488..2e18596f3a8e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> > @@ -159,6 +159,12 @@ struct ufs_pm_lvl_states ufs_pm_lvl_states[] = {
> >  	{UFS_POWERDOWN_PWR_MODE, UIC_LINK_OFF_STATE},
> >  };
> > 
> > +#define ufshcd_scsi_for_each_sdev(fn) \
> > +	list_for_each_entry(starget, &hba->host->__targets, siblings) { \
> > +		__starget_for_each_device(starget, NULL, \
> > +					  fn); \
> > +	}
> > +
> >  static inline enum ufs_dev_pwr_mode
> >  ufs_get_pm_lvl_to_dev_pwr_mode(enum ufs_pm_level lvl)
> >  {
> > @@ -8620,6 +8626,13 @@ int ufshcd_runtime_idle(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(ufshcd_runtime_idle);
> > 
> > +static void ufshcd_quiesce_sdev(struct scsi_device *sdev, void *data)
> > +{
> > +	/* Suspended devices are already quiesced so can be skipped */
> > +	if (!pm_runtime_suspended(&sdev->sdev_gendev))
> > +		scsi_device_quiesce(sdev);
> > +}
> > +
> >  /**
> >   * ufshcd_shutdown - shutdown routine
> >   * @hba: per adapter instance
> > @@ -8631,6 +8644,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(ufshcd_runtime_idle);
> >  int ufshcd_shutdown(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> >  {
> >  	int ret = 0;
> > +	struct scsi_target *starget;
> > 
> >  	if (!hba->is_powered)
> >  		goto out;
> > @@ -8644,6 +8658,21 @@ int ufshcd_shutdown(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> >  			goto out;
> >  	}
> > 
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Quiesce all SCSI devices to prevent any non-PM requests sending
> > +	 * from block layer during and after shutdown.
> > +	 *
> > +	 * Here we can not use blk_cleanup_queue() since PM requests
> > +	 * (with BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT flag) are still required to be sent
> > +	 * through block layer. Therefore SCSI command queued after the
> > +	 * scsi_target_quiesce() call returned will block until
> > +	 * blk_cleanup_queue() is called.
> > +	 *
> > +	 * Besides, scsi_target_"un"quiesce (e.g., scsi_target_resume) can
> > +	 * be ignored since shutdown is one-way flow.
> > +	 */
> > +	ufshcd_scsi_for_each_sdev(ufshcd_quiesce_sdev);
> > +
> >  	ret = ufshcd_suspend(hba, UFS_SHUTDOWN_PM);
> >  out:
> >  	if (ret)


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
To: Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>
Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	"Andy Teng (^[$B{}G!9(^[(B)" <Andy.Teng@mediatek.com>,
	"jejb@linux.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Chun-Hung Wu (巫駿宏)" <Chun-hung.Wu@mediatek.com>,
	"Kuohong Wang (王國鴻)" <kuohong.wang@mediatek.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"asutoshd@codeaurora.org" <asutoshd@codeaurora.org>,
	"avri.altman@wdc.com" <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
	"linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
	"Peter Wang (王信友)" <peter.wang@mediatek.com>,
	"alim.akhtar@samsung.com" <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
	"matthias.bgg@gmail.com" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	"beanhuo@micron.com" <beanhuo@micron.com>,
	"Chaotian Jing (井朝天)" <Chaotian.Jing@mediatek.com>,
	"CC Chou (周志杰)" <cc.chou@mediatek.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"bvanassche@acm.org" <bvanassche@acm.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] scsi: ufs: Quiesce all scsi devices before shutdown
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 16:22:53 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1596183773.17247.60.camel@mtkswgap22> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <84510fc12ada0de8284e6a689b7a2358@codeaurora.org>

Hi Can,

On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 15:30 +0800, Can Guo wrote:
> Hi Stanley,
> 
> On 2020-07-24 22:01, Stanley Chu wrote:
> > Currently I/O request could be still submitted to UFS device while
> > UFS is working on shutdown flow. This may lead to racing as below
> > scenarios and finally system may crash due to unclocked register
> > accesses.
> > 
> > To fix this kind of issues, specifically quiesce all SCSI devices
> > before UFS shutdown to block all I/O request sending from block
> > layer.
> > 
> > Example of racing scenario: While UFS device is runtime-suspended
> > 
> > Thread #1: Executing UFS shutdown flow, e.g.,
> >            ufshcd_suspend(UFS_SHUTDOWN_PM)
> > Thread #2: Executing runtime resume flow triggered by I/O request,
> >            e.g., ufshcd_resume(UFS_RUNTIME_PM)
> > 
> 
> I don't quite get it, how can you prevent block layer PM from iniating
> hba runtime resume by quiescing the scsi devices? Block layer PM
> iniates hba async runtime resume in blk_queue_enter(). But quiescing
> the scsi devices can only prevent general I/O requests from passing
> through scsi_queue_rq() callback.
> 
> Say hba is runtime suspended, if an I/O request to sda is sent from
> block layer (sda must be runtime suspended as well at this time),
> blk_queue_enter() initiates async runtime resume for sda. But since
> sda's parents are also runtime suspended, the RPM framework shall do
> runtime resume to the devices in the sequence hba->host->target->sda.
> In this case, ufshcd_resume() still runs concurrently, no?
> 

You are right. This patch can not fix the case you mentioned. It just
prevents "general I/O requests".

So perhaps we also need below patch?

#2 scsi: ufs: Use pm_runtime_get_sync in shutdown flow
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10964097/

The above patch #2 let runtime PM framework manage and prevent
concurrent runtime operations in device driver.

And then using patch #1 (this patch) to block general I/O requests after
ufshcd device is resumed.

Thanks,
Stanley Chu


> Thanks,
> 
> Can Guo.
> 
> > This breaks the assumption that UFS PM flows can not be running
> > concurrently and some unexpected racing behavior may happen.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> > index 9d180da77488..2e18596f3a8e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> > @@ -159,6 +159,12 @@ struct ufs_pm_lvl_states ufs_pm_lvl_states[] = {
> >  	{UFS_POWERDOWN_PWR_MODE, UIC_LINK_OFF_STATE},
> >  };
> > 
> > +#define ufshcd_scsi_for_each_sdev(fn) \
> > +	list_for_each_entry(starget, &hba->host->__targets, siblings) { \
> > +		__starget_for_each_device(starget, NULL, \
> > +					  fn); \
> > +	}
> > +
> >  static inline enum ufs_dev_pwr_mode
> >  ufs_get_pm_lvl_to_dev_pwr_mode(enum ufs_pm_level lvl)
> >  {
> > @@ -8620,6 +8626,13 @@ int ufshcd_runtime_idle(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(ufshcd_runtime_idle);
> > 
> > +static void ufshcd_quiesce_sdev(struct scsi_device *sdev, void *data)
> > +{
> > +	/* Suspended devices are already quiesced so can be skipped */
> > +	if (!pm_runtime_suspended(&sdev->sdev_gendev))
> > +		scsi_device_quiesce(sdev);
> > +}
> > +
> >  /**
> >   * ufshcd_shutdown - shutdown routine
> >   * @hba: per adapter instance
> > @@ -8631,6 +8644,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(ufshcd_runtime_idle);
> >  int ufshcd_shutdown(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> >  {
> >  	int ret = 0;
> > +	struct scsi_target *starget;
> > 
> >  	if (!hba->is_powered)
> >  		goto out;
> > @@ -8644,6 +8658,21 @@ int ufshcd_shutdown(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> >  			goto out;
> >  	}
> > 
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Quiesce all SCSI devices to prevent any non-PM requests sending
> > +	 * from block layer during and after shutdown.
> > +	 *
> > +	 * Here we can not use blk_cleanup_queue() since PM requests
> > +	 * (with BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT flag) are still required to be sent
> > +	 * through block layer. Therefore SCSI command queued after the
> > +	 * scsi_target_quiesce() call returned will block until
> > +	 * blk_cleanup_queue() is called.
> > +	 *
> > +	 * Besides, scsi_target_"un"quiesce (e.g., scsi_target_resume) can
> > +	 * be ignored since shutdown is one-way flow.
> > +	 */
> > +	ufshcd_scsi_for_each_sdev(ufshcd_quiesce_sdev);
> > +
> >  	ret = ufshcd_suspend(hba, UFS_SHUTDOWN_PM);
> >  out:
> >  	if (ret)

_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
To: Can Guo <cang@codeaurora.org>
Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
	"Andy Teng (^[$B{}G!9(^[(B)" <Andy.Teng@mediatek.com>,
	"jejb@linux.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Chun-Hung Wu (巫駿宏)" <Chun-hung.Wu@mediatek.com>,
	"Kuohong Wang (王國鴻)" <kuohong.wang@mediatek.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"asutoshd@codeaurora.org" <asutoshd@codeaurora.org>,
	"avri.altman@wdc.com" <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
	"linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
	"Peter Wang (王信友)" <peter.wang@mediatek.com>,
	"alim.akhtar@samsung.com" <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
	"matthias.bgg@gmail.com" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	"beanhuo@micron.com" <beanhuo@micron.com>,
	"Chaotian Jing (井朝天)" <Chaotian.Jing@mediatek.com>,
	"CC Chou (周志杰)" <cc.chou@mediatek.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"bvanassche@acm.org" <bvanassche@acm.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] scsi: ufs: Quiesce all scsi devices before shutdown
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 16:22:53 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1596183773.17247.60.camel@mtkswgap22> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <84510fc12ada0de8284e6a689b7a2358@codeaurora.org>

Hi Can,

On Mon, 2020-07-27 at 15:30 +0800, Can Guo wrote:
> Hi Stanley,
> 
> On 2020-07-24 22:01, Stanley Chu wrote:
> > Currently I/O request could be still submitted to UFS device while
> > UFS is working on shutdown flow. This may lead to racing as below
> > scenarios and finally system may crash due to unclocked register
> > accesses.
> > 
> > To fix this kind of issues, specifically quiesce all SCSI devices
> > before UFS shutdown to block all I/O request sending from block
> > layer.
> > 
> > Example of racing scenario: While UFS device is runtime-suspended
> > 
> > Thread #1: Executing UFS shutdown flow, e.g.,
> >            ufshcd_suspend(UFS_SHUTDOWN_PM)
> > Thread #2: Executing runtime resume flow triggered by I/O request,
> >            e.g., ufshcd_resume(UFS_RUNTIME_PM)
> > 
> 
> I don't quite get it, how can you prevent block layer PM from iniating
> hba runtime resume by quiescing the scsi devices? Block layer PM
> iniates hba async runtime resume in blk_queue_enter(). But quiescing
> the scsi devices can only prevent general I/O requests from passing
> through scsi_queue_rq() callback.
> 
> Say hba is runtime suspended, if an I/O request to sda is sent from
> block layer (sda must be runtime suspended as well at this time),
> blk_queue_enter() initiates async runtime resume for sda. But since
> sda's parents are also runtime suspended, the RPM framework shall do
> runtime resume to the devices in the sequence hba->host->target->sda.
> In this case, ufshcd_resume() still runs concurrently, no?
> 

You are right. This patch can not fix the case you mentioned. It just
prevents "general I/O requests".

So perhaps we also need below patch?

#2 scsi: ufs: Use pm_runtime_get_sync in shutdown flow
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10964097/

The above patch #2 let runtime PM framework manage and prevent
concurrent runtime operations in device driver.

And then using patch #1 (this patch) to block general I/O requests after
ufshcd device is resumed.

Thanks,
Stanley Chu


> Thanks,
> 
> Can Guo.
> 
> > This breaks the assumption that UFS PM flows can not be running
> > concurrently and some unexpected racing behavior may happen.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> > index 9d180da77488..2e18596f3a8e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
> > @@ -159,6 +159,12 @@ struct ufs_pm_lvl_states ufs_pm_lvl_states[] = {
> >  	{UFS_POWERDOWN_PWR_MODE, UIC_LINK_OFF_STATE},
> >  };
> > 
> > +#define ufshcd_scsi_for_each_sdev(fn) \
> > +	list_for_each_entry(starget, &hba->host->__targets, siblings) { \
> > +		__starget_for_each_device(starget, NULL, \
> > +					  fn); \
> > +	}
> > +
> >  static inline enum ufs_dev_pwr_mode
> >  ufs_get_pm_lvl_to_dev_pwr_mode(enum ufs_pm_level lvl)
> >  {
> > @@ -8620,6 +8626,13 @@ int ufshcd_runtime_idle(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL(ufshcd_runtime_idle);
> > 
> > +static void ufshcd_quiesce_sdev(struct scsi_device *sdev, void *data)
> > +{
> > +	/* Suspended devices are already quiesced so can be skipped */
> > +	if (!pm_runtime_suspended(&sdev->sdev_gendev))
> > +		scsi_device_quiesce(sdev);
> > +}
> > +
> >  /**
> >   * ufshcd_shutdown - shutdown routine
> >   * @hba: per adapter instance
> > @@ -8631,6 +8644,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(ufshcd_runtime_idle);
> >  int ufshcd_shutdown(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> >  {
> >  	int ret = 0;
> > +	struct scsi_target *starget;
> > 
> >  	if (!hba->is_powered)
> >  		goto out;
> > @@ -8644,6 +8658,21 @@ int ufshcd_shutdown(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> >  			goto out;
> >  	}
> > 
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Quiesce all SCSI devices to prevent any non-PM requests sending
> > +	 * from block layer during and after shutdown.
> > +	 *
> > +	 * Here we can not use blk_cleanup_queue() since PM requests
> > +	 * (with BLK_MQ_REQ_PREEMPT flag) are still required to be sent
> > +	 * through block layer. Therefore SCSI command queued after the
> > +	 * scsi_target_quiesce() call returned will block until
> > +	 * blk_cleanup_queue() is called.
> > +	 *
> > +	 * Besides, scsi_target_"un"quiesce (e.g., scsi_target_resume) can
> > +	 * be ignored since shutdown is one-way flow.
> > +	 */
> > +	ufshcd_scsi_for_each_sdev(ufshcd_quiesce_sdev);
> > +
> >  	ret = ufshcd_suspend(hba, UFS_SHUTDOWN_PM);
> >  out:
> >  	if (ret)

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-31  8:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-24 14:01 [PATCH v4] scsi: ufs: Quiesce all scsi devices before shutdown Stanley Chu
2020-07-24 14:01 ` Stanley Chu
2020-07-24 14:01 ` Stanley Chu
2020-07-27  7:30 ` Can Guo
2020-07-27  7:30   ` Can Guo
2020-07-27  7:30   ` Can Guo
2020-07-31  8:22   ` Stanley Chu [this message]
2020-07-31  8:22     ` Stanley Chu
2020-07-31  8:22     ` Stanley Chu
     [not found]     ` <1d74498da71ba54e23cd82ee6400dbd4@codeaurora.org>
2020-07-31  9:27       ` Stanley Chu
2020-07-31  9:27         ` Stanley Chu
2020-07-31  9:27         ` Stanley Chu

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=1596183773.17247.60.camel@mtkswgap22 \
    --to=stanley.chu@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Andy.Teng@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Chaotian.Jing@mediatek.com \
    --cc=Chun-hung.Wu@mediatek.com \
    --cc=alim.akhtar@samsung.com \
    --cc=asutoshd@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=avri.altman@wdc.com \
    --cc=beanhuo@micron.com \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=cang@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=cc.chou@mediatek.com \
    --cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kuohong.wang@mediatek.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
    --cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
    --cc=peter.wang@mediatek.com \
    /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.