From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Martin Doucha <mdoucha@suse.cz>,
hch@infradead.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, bfields@fieldses.org,
bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, chainsaw@gentoo.org,
christian.brauner@ubuntu.com, chuck.lever@oracle.com,
davem@davemloft.net, dhowells@redhat.com,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com,
jmorris@namei.org, josh@joshtriplett.org, keescook@chromium.org,
keyrings@vger.kernel.org, kuba@kernel.org,
lars.ellenberg@linbit.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com, philipp.reisner@linbit.com,
ravenexp@gmail.com, roopa@cumulusnetworks.com, serge@hallyn.com,
slyfox@gentoo.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
yangtiezhu@loongson.cn, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
markward@linux.ibm.com, linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 16:13:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200624161319.GM13911@42.do-not-panic.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200624131725.GL13911@42.do-not-panic.com>
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 01:17:25PM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> I found however an LTP bug indicating the need to test for
> s390 wait macros [0] in light of a recent bug in glibc for s390.
> I am asking for references to that issue given I cannot find
> any mention of this on glibc yet.
>
> [0] https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/issues/605
I looked into this and the bug associated was:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id\x19613
The commit in question was upstream glibc commit
b49ab5f4503f36dcbf43f821f817da66b2931fe6 ("Remove union wait [BZ
#19613]"), and while I don't see anything s390 mentioned there,
the issue there was due to the caller of the wait using a long
instead of an int for the return value.
In other words, that'd not the droid we are looking for.
So the issue is something else.
Luis
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Martin Doucha <mdoucha@suse.cz>,
hch@infradead.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, axboe@kernel.dk, bfields@fieldses.org,
bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, chainsaw@gentoo.org,
christian.brauner@ubuntu.com, chuck.lever@oracle.com,
davem@davemloft.net, dhowells@redhat.com,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com,
jmorris@namei.org, josh@joshtriplett.org, keescook@chromium.org,
keyrings@vger.kernel.org, kuba@kernel.org,
lars.ellenberg@linbit.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com, philipp.reisner@linbit.com,
ravenexp@gmail.com, roopa@cumulusnetworks.com, serge@hallyn.com,
slyfox@gentoo.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
yangtiezhu@loongson.cn, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
markward@linux.ibm.com, linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 16:13:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200624161319.GM13911@42.do-not-panic.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200624131725.GL13911@42.do-not-panic.com>
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 01:17:25PM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> I found however an LTP bug indicating the need to test for
> s390 wait macros [0] in light of a recent bug in glibc for s390.
> I am asking for references to that issue given I cannot find
> any mention of this on glibc yet.
>
> [0] https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/issues/605
I looked into this and the bug associated was:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19613
The commit in question was upstream glibc commit
b49ab5f4503f36dcbf43f821f817da66b2931fe6 ("Remove union wait [BZ
#19613]"), and while I don't see anything s390 mentioned there,
the issue there was due to the caller of the wait using a long
instead of an int for the return value.
In other words, that'd not the droid we are looking for.
So the issue is something else.
Luis
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Martin Doucha <mdoucha@suse.cz>,
hch@infradead.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com,
philipp.reisner@linbit.com, dhowells@redhat.com,
keyrings@vger.kernel.org, christian.brauner@ubuntu.com,
yangtiezhu@loongson.cn, linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, jmorris@namei.org,
kuba@kernel.org, serge@hallyn.com, keescook@chromium.org,
nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com, roopa@cumulusnetworks.com,
josh@joshtriplett.org, slyfox@gentoo.org,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, axboe@kernel.dk, bfields@fieldses.org,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, chainsaw@gentoo.org,
ravenexp@gmail.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
markward@linux.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, chuck.lever@oracle.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
lars.ellenberg@linbit.com, davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 16:13:23 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200624161319.GM13911@42.do-not-panic.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200624131725.GL13911@42.do-not-panic.com>
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 01:17:25PM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> I found however an LTP bug indicating the need to test for
> s390 wait macros [0] in light of a recent bug in glibc for s390.
> I am asking for references to that issue given I cannot find
> any mention of this on glibc yet.
>
> [0] https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/issues/605
I looked into this and the bug associated was:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19613
The commit in question was upstream glibc commit
b49ab5f4503f36dcbf43f821f817da66b2931fe6 ("Remove union wait [BZ
#19613]"), and while I don't see anything s390 mentioned there,
the issue there was due to the caller of the wait using a long
instead of an int for the return value.
In other words, that'd not the droid we are looking for.
So the issue is something else.
Luis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-24 16:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 124+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-10 15:49 [PATCH 0/5] kmod/umh: a few fixes Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [Bridge] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [PATCH 1/5] selftests: kmod: Use variable NAME in kmod_test_0001() Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [Bridge] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [PATCH 2/5] kmod: Remove redundant "be an" in the comment Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [Bridge] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [PATCH 3/5] test_kmod: Avoid potential double free in trigger_config_run_type() Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [Bridge] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [PATCH 4/5] umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [Bridge] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-23 14:11 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-23 14:12 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-23 14:11 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-23 14:23 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-23 15:09 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-23 14:23 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 11:11 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 11:12 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 11:11 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 12:05 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 12:05 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 12:05 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 13:17 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 13:17 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 13:17 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 16:13 ` Luis Chamberlain [this message]
2020-06-24 16:13 ` [Bridge] " Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 16:13 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 14:43 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-24 14:43 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-24 14:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-24 15:54 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 15:56 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 15:54 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 16:09 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 16:09 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 16:09 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-24 17:58 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 17:59 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 17:58 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:09 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:10 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:09 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:32 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:32 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:32 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:37 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:38 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-24 18:37 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-25 13:26 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-25 13:27 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-25 13:26 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-26 2:54 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26 2:54 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26 2:54 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26 5:22 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-26 5:24 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-26 5:22 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-06-26 9:00 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-26 9:00 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-26 9:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2020-06-26 11:40 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26 11:40 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26 11:40 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26 11:50 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26 11:50 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-26 11:50 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-30 17:57 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-30 17:57 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-30 17:57 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 10:08 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 10:08 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 10:08 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 13:24 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-01 13:24 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-01 13:24 ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-01 13:53 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 13:53 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 13:53 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 14:08 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-01 14:08 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-01 14:08 ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-01 15:38 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 15:39 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 15:38 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 15:48 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 15:49 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 15:48 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 15:58 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 15:58 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 15:58 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 16:01 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 16:03 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 16:01 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-02 4:26 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-02 4:26 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-02 4:26 ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-02 19:46 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-02 19:47 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-02 19:46 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-03 0:52 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-03 0:52 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-03 0:52 ` Tetsuo Handa
2020-07-03 13:28 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-03 13:28 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-03 13:28 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 15:26 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 15:27 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 15:26 ` Christian Borntraeger
2020-07-01 13:46 ` linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 13:46 ` [Bridge] linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected) Luis Chamberlain
2020-07-01 13:46 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [PATCH 5/5] selftests: simplify kmod failure value Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` [Bridge] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-10 15:49 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2020-06-18 0:43 ` [PATCH 0/5] kmod/umh: a few fixes Andrew Morton
2020-06-18 0:43 ` [Bridge] " Andrew Morton
2020-06-18 0:43 ` Andrew Morton
2020-06-19 20:46 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-19 20:46 ` [Bridge] " Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-19 20:46 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-19 21:07 ` Luis Chamberlain
2020-06-19 21:07 ` [Bridge] " Luis Chamberlain
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=20200624161319.GM13911@42.do-not-panic.com \
--to=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chainsaw@gentoo.org \
--cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=lars.ellenberg@linbit.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=markward@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mdoucha@suse.cz \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com \
--cc=philipp.reisner@linbit.com \
--cc=ravenexp@gmail.com \
--cc=roopa@cumulusnetworks.com \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=slyfox@gentoo.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=yangtiezhu@loongson.cn \
/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.