All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Fan Wu <wufan@codeaurora.org>,
	Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Tyler Baicar <baicar.tyler@gmail.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Dongjiu Geng <gengdongjiu@huawei.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	arm-mail-list <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 10/25] ACPI / APEI: Tell firmware the estatus queue consumed the records
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 12:49:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190129114952.GA30613@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18138b57-51ba-c99c-5b8d-b263fb964714@arm.com>

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 06:36:38PM +0000, James Morse wrote:
> Do you consider ENOENT an error? We don't ack in that case as the
> memory wasn't in use.

So let's see:

        if (!*buf_paddr)
                return -ENOENT;

can happen when apei_read() has returned 0 but it has managed to do

	*val = 0;

Now, that function returns error values which we should be checking
but we're checking the buf_paddr pointed to value for being 0. Are
we fearing that even if acpi_os_read_memory() or acpi_os_read_port()
succeed, *buf_paddr could still be 0 ?

Because if not, we should be checking whether rc == -EINVAL and then
convert it to -ENOENT.

But ghes_read_estatus() handles the error case first *and* *then* checks
buf_paddr too, to make really really sure we won't be reading from
address 0.

> For the other cases its because the records are bogus, but we still
> unconditionally tell firmware we're done with them.

... to free the memory, yes, ok.

> >> I think it is. 18.3.2.8 of ACPI v6.2 (search for Generic Hardware Error Source
> >> version 2", then below the table):
> >> * OSPM detects error (via interrupt/exception or polling the block status)
> >> * OSPM copies the error status block
> >> * OSPM clears the block status field of the error status block
> >> * OSPM acknowledges the error via Read Ack register
> >>
> >> The ENOENT case is excluded by 'polling the block status'.
> > 
> > Ok, so we signal the absence of an error record with ENOENT.
> > 
> >         if (!buf_paddr)
> >                 return -ENOENT;
> > 
> > Can that even happen?
> 
> Yes, for NOTIFY_POLLED its the norm. For the IRQ flavours that walk a list of
> GHES, all but one of them will return ENOENT.

Lemme get this straight: when we do

	apei_read(&buf_paddr, &g->error_status_address);

in the polled case, buf_paddr can be 0?

> We could try it and see. It depends if firmware shares ack locations between
> multiple GHES. We could ack an empty GHES, and it removes the records of one we
> haven't looked at yet.

Yeah, OTOH, we shouldn't be pushing our luck here, I guess.

So let's sum up: we'll ack the GHES error in all but the -ENOENT cases
in order to free the memory occupied by the error record.

The slightly "pathological" -ENOENT case is I guess how the fw behaves
when it is being polled and also for broken firmware which could report
a 0 buf_paddr.

Btw, that last thing I'm assuming because

  d334a49113a4 ("ACPI, APEI, Generic Hardware Error Source memory error support")

doesn't say what that check was needed for.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: Tyler Baicar <baicar.tyler@gmail.com>,
	Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	arm-mail-list <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
	Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Dongjiu Geng <gengdongjiu@huawei.com>,
	Xie XiuQi <xiexiuqi@huawei.com>, Fan Wu <wufan@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 10/25] ACPI / APEI: Tell firmware the estatus queue consumed the records
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 12:49:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190129114952.GA30613@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18138b57-51ba-c99c-5b8d-b263fb964714@arm.com>

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 06:36:38PM +0000, James Morse wrote:
> Do you consider ENOENT an error? We don't ack in that case as the
> memory wasn't in use.

So let's see:

        if (!*buf_paddr)
                return -ENOENT;

can happen when apei_read() has returned 0 but it has managed to do

	*val = 0;

Now, that function returns error values which we should be checking
but we're checking the buf_paddr pointed to value for being 0. Are
we fearing that even if acpi_os_read_memory() or acpi_os_read_port()
succeed, *buf_paddr could still be 0 ?

Because if not, we should be checking whether rc == -EINVAL and then
convert it to -ENOENT.

But ghes_read_estatus() handles the error case first *and* *then* checks
buf_paddr too, to make really really sure we won't be reading from
address 0.

> For the other cases its because the records are bogus, but we still
> unconditionally tell firmware we're done with them.

... to free the memory, yes, ok.

> >> I think it is. 18.3.2.8 of ACPI v6.2 (search for Generic Hardware Error Source
> >> version 2", then below the table):
> >> * OSPM detects error (via interrupt/exception or polling the block status)
> >> * OSPM copies the error status block
> >> * OSPM clears the block status field of the error status block
> >> * OSPM acknowledges the error via Read Ack register
> >>
> >> The ENOENT case is excluded by 'polling the block status'.
> > 
> > Ok, so we signal the absence of an error record with ENOENT.
> > 
> >         if (!buf_paddr)
> >                 return -ENOENT;
> > 
> > Can that even happen?
> 
> Yes, for NOTIFY_POLLED its the norm. For the IRQ flavours that walk a list of
> GHES, all but one of them will return ENOENT.

Lemme get this straight: when we do

	apei_read(&buf_paddr, &g->error_status_address);

in the polled case, buf_paddr can be 0?

> We could try it and see. It depends if firmware shares ack locations between
> multiple GHES. We could ack an empty GHES, and it removes the records of one we
> haven't looked at yet.

Yeah, OTOH, we shouldn't be pushing our luck here, I guess.

So let's sum up: we'll ack the GHES error in all but the -ENOENT cases
in order to free the memory occupied by the error record.

The slightly "pathological" -ENOENT case is I guess how the fw behaves
when it is being polled and also for broken firmware which could report
a 0 buf_paddr.

Btw, that last thing I'm assuming because

  d334a49113a4 ("ACPI, APEI, Generic Hardware Error Source memory error support")

doesn't say what that check was needed for.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Fan Wu <wufan@codeaurora.org>,
	Xie XiuQi <xiexiuqi@huawei.com>,
	Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Tyler Baicar <baicar.tyler@gmail.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@arm.com>,
	Dongjiu Geng <gengdongjiu@huawei.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	arm-mail-list <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 10/25] ACPI / APEI: Tell firmware the estatus queue consumed the records
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 12:49:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190129114952.GA30613@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18138b57-51ba-c99c-5b8d-b263fb964714@arm.com>

On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 06:36:38PM +0000, James Morse wrote:
> Do you consider ENOENT an error? We don't ack in that case as the
> memory wasn't in use.

So let's see:

        if (!*buf_paddr)
                return -ENOENT;

can happen when apei_read() has returned 0 but it has managed to do

	*val = 0;

Now, that function returns error values which we should be checking
but we're checking the buf_paddr pointed to value for being 0. Are
we fearing that even if acpi_os_read_memory() or acpi_os_read_port()
succeed, *buf_paddr could still be 0 ?

Because if not, we should be checking whether rc == -EINVAL and then
convert it to -ENOENT.

But ghes_read_estatus() handles the error case first *and* *then* checks
buf_paddr too, to make really really sure we won't be reading from
address 0.

> For the other cases its because the records are bogus, but we still
> unconditionally tell firmware we're done with them.

... to free the memory, yes, ok.

> >> I think it is. 18.3.2.8 of ACPI v6.2 (search for Generic Hardware Error Source
> >> version 2", then below the table):
> >> * OSPM detects error (via interrupt/exception or polling the block status)
> >> * OSPM copies the error status block
> >> * OSPM clears the block status field of the error status block
> >> * OSPM acknowledges the error via Read Ack register
> >>
> >> The ENOENT case is excluded by 'polling the block status'.
> > 
> > Ok, so we signal the absence of an error record with ENOENT.
> > 
> >         if (!buf_paddr)
> >                 return -ENOENT;
> > 
> > Can that even happen?
> 
> Yes, for NOTIFY_POLLED its the norm. For the IRQ flavours that walk a list of
> GHES, all but one of them will return ENOENT.

Lemme get this straight: when we do

	apei_read(&buf_paddr, &g->error_status_address);

in the polled case, buf_paddr can be 0?

> We could try it and see. It depends if firmware shares ack locations between
> multiple GHES. We could ack an empty GHES, and it removes the records of one we
> haven't looked at yet.

Yeah, OTOH, we shouldn't be pushing our luck here, I guess.

So let's sum up: we'll ack the GHES error in all but the -ENOENT cases
in order to free the memory occupied by the error record.

The slightly "pathological" -ENOENT case is I guess how the fw behaves
when it is being polled and also for broken firmware which could report
a 0 buf_paddr.

Btw, that last thing I'm assuming because

  d334a49113a4 ("ACPI, APEI, Generic Hardware Error Source memory error support")

doesn't say what that check was needed for.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.

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

  reply	other threads:[~2019-01-29 11:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 219+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-03 18:05 [PATCH v7 00/25] APEI in_nmi() rework and SDEI wire-up James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05 ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05 ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05 ` [PATCH v7 01/25] ACPI / APEI: Don't wait to serialise with oops messages when panic()ing James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05 ` [PATCH v7 02/25] ACPI / APEI: Remove silent flag from ghes_read_estatus() James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-04 11:36   ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-04 11:36     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-04 11:36     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-03 18:05 ` [PATCH v7 03/25] ACPI / APEI: Switch estatus pool to use vmalloc memory James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-04 13:01   ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-04 13:01     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-04 13:01     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-03 18:05 ` [PATCH v7 04/25] ACPI / APEI: Make hest.c manage the estatus memory pool James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-11 16:48   ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-11 16:48     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-11 16:48     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-14 13:56     ` James Morse
2018-12-14 13:56       ` James Morse
2018-12-14 13:56       ` James Morse
2018-12-19 14:42       ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-19 14:42         ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-19 14:42         ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-10 18:20         ` James Morse
2019-01-10 18:20           ` James Morse
2019-01-10 18:20           ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05 ` [PATCH v7 05/25] ACPI / APEI: Make estatus pool allocation a static size James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-11 16:54   ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-11 16:54     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-11 16:54     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-03 18:05 ` [PATCH v7 06/25] ACPI / APEI: Don't store CPER records physical address in struct ghes James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-11 17:04   ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-11 17:04     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-11 17:04     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-03 18:05 ` [PATCH v7 07/25] ACPI / APEI: Remove spurious GHES_TO_CLEAR check James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-11 17:18   ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-11 17:18     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-11 17:18     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-03 18:05 ` [PATCH v7 08/25] ACPI / APEI: Don't update struct ghes' flags in read/clear estatus James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05 ` [PATCH v7 09/25] ACPI / APEI: Generalise the estatus queue's notify code James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-11 17:44   ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-11 17:44     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-11 17:44     ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-10 18:21     ` James Morse
2019-01-10 18:21       ` James Morse
2019-01-10 18:21       ` James Morse
2019-01-11 11:46       ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 11:46         ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 11:46         ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-03 18:05 ` [PATCH v7 10/25] ACPI / APEI: Tell firmware the estatus queue consumed the records James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-11 18:36   ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-11 18:36     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-11 18:36     ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-10 18:22     ` James Morse
2019-01-10 18:22       ` James Morse
2019-01-10 18:22       ` James Morse
2019-01-10 21:01       ` Tyler Baicar
2019-01-10 21:01         ` Tyler Baicar
2019-01-10 21:01         ` Tyler Baicar
2019-01-10 21:01         ` Tyler Baicar
2019-01-11 12:03         ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 12:03           ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 12:03           ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 15:32           ` Tyler Baicar
2019-01-11 15:32             ` Tyler Baicar
2019-01-11 15:32             ` Tyler Baicar
2019-01-11 15:32             ` Tyler Baicar
2019-01-11 17:45             ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 17:45               ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 17:45               ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 18:25               ` James Morse
2019-01-11 18:25                 ` James Morse
2019-01-11 18:25                 ` James Morse
2019-01-11 19:58                 ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 19:58                   ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 19:58                   ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-23 18:36                   ` James Morse
2019-01-23 18:36                     ` James Morse
2019-01-23 18:36                     ` James Morse
2019-01-29 11:49                     ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2019-01-29 11:49                       ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-29 11:49                       ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-29 18:48                       ` James Morse
2019-01-29 18:48                         ` James Morse
2019-01-29 18:48                         ` James Morse
2019-01-31 13:29                         ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-31 13:29                           ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-31 13:29                           ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 18:09             ` James Morse
2019-01-11 18:09               ` James Morse
2019-01-11 18:09               ` James Morse
2019-01-11 20:01               ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 20:01                 ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 20:01                 ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-11 20:53               ` Tyler Baicar
2019-01-11 20:53                 ` Tyler Baicar
2019-01-11 20:53                 ` Tyler Baicar
2019-01-11 20:53                 ` Tyler Baicar
2019-01-29 18:48                 ` James Morse
2019-01-29 18:48                   ` James Morse
2019-01-29 18:48                   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05 ` [PATCH v7 11/25] ACPI / APEI: Move NOTIFY_SEA between the estatus-queue and NOTIFY_NMI James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:05   ` James Morse
2019-01-21 13:01   ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-21 13:01     ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-21 13:01     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 12/25] ACPI / APEI: Switch NOTIFY_SEA to use the estatus queue James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 13/25] KVM: arm/arm64: Add kvm_ras.h to collect kvm specific RAS plumbing James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-06 16:17   ` Catalin Marinas
2018-12-06 16:17     ` Catalin Marinas
2018-12-06 16:17     ` Catalin Marinas
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 14/25] arm64: KVM/mm: Move SEA handling behind a single 'claim' interface James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-06 16:17   ` Catalin Marinas
2018-12-06 16:17     ` Catalin Marinas
2018-12-06 16:17     ` Catalin Marinas
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 15/25] ACPI / APEI: Move locking to the notification helper James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 16/25] ACPI / APEI: Let the notification helper specify the fixmap slot James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 17/25] ACPI / APEI: Pass ghes and estatus separately to avoid a later copy James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2019-01-21 13:35   ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-21 13:35     ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-21 13:35     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 18/25] ACPI / APEI: Split ghes_read_estatus() to allow a peek at the CPER length James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2019-01-21 13:53   ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-21 13:53     ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-21 13:53     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 19/25] ACPI / APEI: Only use queued estatus entry during _in_nmi_notify_one() James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2019-01-21 17:19   ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-21 17:19     ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-21 17:19     ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 20/25] ACPI / APEI: Use separate fixmap pages for arm64 NMI-like notifications James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2019-01-21 17:27   ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-21 17:27     ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-21 17:27     ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-23 18:33     ` James Morse
2019-01-23 18:33       ` James Morse
2019-01-23 18:33       ` James Morse
2019-01-31 13:38       ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-31 13:38         ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-31 13:38         ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 21/25] mm/memory-failure: Add memory_failure_queue_kick() James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 22/25] ACPI / APEI: Kick the memory_failure() queue for synchronous errors James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-05  2:02   ` Xie XiuQi
2018-12-05  2:02     ` Xie XiuQi
2018-12-05  2:02     ` Xie XiuQi
2018-12-10 19:15     ` James Morse
2018-12-10 19:15       ` James Morse
2018-12-10 19:15       ` James Morse
2019-01-22 10:51       ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-22 10:51         ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-22 10:51         ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-23 18:37         ` James Morse
2019-01-23 18:37           ` James Morse
2019-01-23 18:37           ` James Morse
2019-01-21 17:58   ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-21 17:58     ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-21 17:58     ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-23 18:40     ` James Morse
2019-01-23 18:40       ` James Morse
2019-01-23 18:40       ` James Morse
2019-01-31 14:04       ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-31 14:04         ` Borislav Petkov
2019-01-31 14:04         ` Borislav Petkov
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 23/25] arm64: acpi: Make apei_claim_sea() synchronise with APEI's irq work James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-06 16:18   ` Catalin Marinas
2018-12-06 16:18     ` Catalin Marinas
2018-12-06 16:18     ` Catalin Marinas
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 24/25] firmware: arm_sdei: Add ACPI GHES registration helper James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-06 16:18   ` Catalin Marinas
2018-12-06 16:18     ` Catalin Marinas
2018-12-06 16:18     ` Catalin Marinas
2018-12-03 18:06 ` [PATCH v7 25/25] ACPI / APEI: Add support for the SDEI GHES Notification type James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse
2018-12-03 18:06   ` James Morse

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=20190129114952.GA30613@zn.tnic \
    --to=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=baicar.tyler@gmail.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=gengdongjiu@huawei.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=wufan@codeaurora.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.