All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	kernel-team@android.com, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: arm64: Commit pending PC adjustemnts before returning to userspace
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 15:55:28 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7a0f43c8-cc36-810e-0b8e-ffe66672ca82@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210510094915.1909484-3-maz@kernel.org>

Hi Marc,

On 5/10/21 10:49 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> KVM currently updates PC (and the corresponding exception state)
> using a two phase approach: first by setting a set of flags,
> then by converting these flags into a state update when the vcpu
> is about to enter the guest.
>
> However, this creates a disconnect with userspace if the vcpu thread
> returns there with any exception/PC flag set. In this case, the exposed

The code seems to handle only the KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION flag. Is the "PC
flag" a reference to the KVM_ARM64_INCREMENT_PC flag?

> context is wrong, as userpsace doesn't have access to these flags

s/userpsace/userspace

> (they aren't architectural). It also means that these flags are
> preserved across a reset, which isn't expected.
>
> To solve this problem, force an explicit synchronisation of the
> exception state on vcpu exit to userspace. As an optimisation
> for nVHE systems, only perform this when there is something pending.
>
> Reported-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.11
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h   |  1 +
>  arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c               | 10 ++++++++++
>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c     |  4 ++--
>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c |  8 ++++++++
>  4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
> index d5b11037401d..5e9b33cbac51 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
> @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@
>  #define __KVM_HOST_SMCCC_FUNC___pkvm_cpu_set_vector		18
>  #define __KVM_HOST_SMCCC_FUNC___pkvm_prot_finalize		19
>  #define __KVM_HOST_SMCCC_FUNC___pkvm_mark_hyp			20
> +#define __KVM_HOST_SMCCC_FUNC___kvm_adjust_pc			21
>  
>  #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>  
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> index 1cb39c0803a4..d62a7041ebd1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> @@ -897,6 +897,16 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  
>  	kvm_sigset_deactivate(vcpu);
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * In the unlikely event that we are returning to userspace
> +	 * with pending exceptions or PC adjustment, commit these

I'm going to assume "PC adjustment" means the KVM_ARM64_INCREMENT_PC flag. Please
correct me if that's not true, but if that's the case, then the flag isn't handled
below.

> +	 * adjustments in order to give userspace a consistent view of
> +	 * the vcpu state.
> +	 */
> +	if (unlikely(vcpu->arch.flags & (KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION |
> +					 KVM_ARM64_EXCEPT_MASK)))

The condition seems to suggest that it is valid to set
KVM_ARM64_EXCEPT_{AA32,AA64}_* without setting KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION, which
looks rather odd to me. Is that a valid use of the KVM_ARM64_EXCEPT_MASK bits? If
it's not (the existing code always sets the exception type with the
KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION), that I was thinking that checking only the
KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION flag would make the intention clearer.

Thanks,

Alex

> +		kvm_call_hyp(__kvm_adjust_pc, vcpu);
> +
>  	vcpu_put(vcpu);
>  	return ret;
>  }
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c
> index 0812a496725f..11541b94b328 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c
> @@ -331,8 +331,8 @@ static void kvm_inject_exception(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  }
>  
>  /*
> - * Adjust the guest PC on entry, depending on flags provided by EL1
> - * for the purpose of emulation (MMIO, sysreg) or exception injection.
> + * Adjust the guest PC (and potentially exception state) depending on
> + * flags provided by the emulation code.
>   */
>  void __kvm_adjust_pc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  {
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c
> index f36420a80474..1632f001f4ed 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c
> @@ -28,6 +28,13 @@ static void handle___kvm_vcpu_run(struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt)
>  	cpu_reg(host_ctxt, 1) =  __kvm_vcpu_run(kern_hyp_va(vcpu));
>  }
>  
> +static void handle___kvm_adjust_pc(struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt)
> +{
> +	DECLARE_REG(struct kvm_vcpu *, vcpu, host_ctxt, 1);
> +
> +	__kvm_adjust_pc(kern_hyp_va(vcpu));
> +}
> +
>  static void handle___kvm_flush_vm_context(struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt)
>  {
>  	__kvm_flush_vm_context();
> @@ -170,6 +177,7 @@ typedef void (*hcall_t)(struct kvm_cpu_context *);
>  
>  static const hcall_t host_hcall[] = {
>  	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_vcpu_run),
> +	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_adjust_pc),
>  	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_flush_vm_context),
>  	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_tlb_flush_vmid_ipa),
>  	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_tlb_flush_vmid),

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: kernel-team@android.com, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: arm64: Commit pending PC adjustemnts before returning to userspace
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 15:55:28 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7a0f43c8-cc36-810e-0b8e-ffe66672ca82@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210510094915.1909484-3-maz@kernel.org>

Hi Marc,

On 5/10/21 10:49 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> KVM currently updates PC (and the corresponding exception state)
> using a two phase approach: first by setting a set of flags,
> then by converting these flags into a state update when the vcpu
> is about to enter the guest.
>
> However, this creates a disconnect with userspace if the vcpu thread
> returns there with any exception/PC flag set. In this case, the exposed

The code seems to handle only the KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION flag. Is the "PC
flag" a reference to the KVM_ARM64_INCREMENT_PC flag?

> context is wrong, as userpsace doesn't have access to these flags

s/userpsace/userspace

> (they aren't architectural). It also means that these flags are
> preserved across a reset, which isn't expected.
>
> To solve this problem, force an explicit synchronisation of the
> exception state on vcpu exit to userspace. As an optimisation
> for nVHE systems, only perform this when there is something pending.
>
> Reported-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.11
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h   |  1 +
>  arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c               | 10 ++++++++++
>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c     |  4 ++--
>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c |  8 ++++++++
>  4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
> index d5b11037401d..5e9b33cbac51 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
> @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@
>  #define __KVM_HOST_SMCCC_FUNC___pkvm_cpu_set_vector		18
>  #define __KVM_HOST_SMCCC_FUNC___pkvm_prot_finalize		19
>  #define __KVM_HOST_SMCCC_FUNC___pkvm_mark_hyp			20
> +#define __KVM_HOST_SMCCC_FUNC___kvm_adjust_pc			21
>  
>  #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>  
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> index 1cb39c0803a4..d62a7041ebd1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> @@ -897,6 +897,16 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  
>  	kvm_sigset_deactivate(vcpu);
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * In the unlikely event that we are returning to userspace
> +	 * with pending exceptions or PC adjustment, commit these

I'm going to assume "PC adjustment" means the KVM_ARM64_INCREMENT_PC flag. Please
correct me if that's not true, but if that's the case, then the flag isn't handled
below.

> +	 * adjustments in order to give userspace a consistent view of
> +	 * the vcpu state.
> +	 */
> +	if (unlikely(vcpu->arch.flags & (KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION |
> +					 KVM_ARM64_EXCEPT_MASK)))

The condition seems to suggest that it is valid to set
KVM_ARM64_EXCEPT_{AA32,AA64}_* without setting KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION, which
looks rather odd to me. Is that a valid use of the KVM_ARM64_EXCEPT_MASK bits? If
it's not (the existing code always sets the exception type with the
KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION), that I was thinking that checking only the
KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION flag would make the intention clearer.

Thanks,

Alex

> +		kvm_call_hyp(__kvm_adjust_pc, vcpu);
> +
>  	vcpu_put(vcpu);
>  	return ret;
>  }
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c
> index 0812a496725f..11541b94b328 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c
> @@ -331,8 +331,8 @@ static void kvm_inject_exception(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  }
>  
>  /*
> - * Adjust the guest PC on entry, depending on flags provided by EL1
> - * for the purpose of emulation (MMIO, sysreg) or exception injection.
> + * Adjust the guest PC (and potentially exception state) depending on
> + * flags provided by the emulation code.
>   */
>  void __kvm_adjust_pc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  {
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c
> index f36420a80474..1632f001f4ed 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c
> @@ -28,6 +28,13 @@ static void handle___kvm_vcpu_run(struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt)
>  	cpu_reg(host_ctxt, 1) =  __kvm_vcpu_run(kern_hyp_va(vcpu));
>  }
>  
> +static void handle___kvm_adjust_pc(struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt)
> +{
> +	DECLARE_REG(struct kvm_vcpu *, vcpu, host_ctxt, 1);
> +
> +	__kvm_adjust_pc(kern_hyp_va(vcpu));
> +}
> +
>  static void handle___kvm_flush_vm_context(struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt)
>  {
>  	__kvm_flush_vm_context();
> @@ -170,6 +177,7 @@ typedef void (*hcall_t)(struct kvm_cpu_context *);
>  
>  static const hcall_t host_hcall[] = {
>  	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_vcpu_run),
> +	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_adjust_pc),
>  	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_flush_vm_context),
>  	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_tlb_flush_vmid_ipa),
>  	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_tlb_flush_vmid),
_______________________________________________
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: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	kernel-team@android.com, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: arm64: Commit pending PC adjustemnts before returning to userspace
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 15:55:28 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7a0f43c8-cc36-810e-0b8e-ffe66672ca82@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210510094915.1909484-3-maz@kernel.org>

Hi Marc,

On 5/10/21 10:49 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> KVM currently updates PC (and the corresponding exception state)
> using a two phase approach: first by setting a set of flags,
> then by converting these flags into a state update when the vcpu
> is about to enter the guest.
>
> However, this creates a disconnect with userspace if the vcpu thread
> returns there with any exception/PC flag set. In this case, the exposed

The code seems to handle only the KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION flag. Is the "PC
flag" a reference to the KVM_ARM64_INCREMENT_PC flag?

> context is wrong, as userpsace doesn't have access to these flags

s/userpsace/userspace

> (they aren't architectural). It also means that these flags are
> preserved across a reset, which isn't expected.
>
> To solve this problem, force an explicit synchronisation of the
> exception state on vcpu exit to userspace. As an optimisation
> for nVHE systems, only perform this when there is something pending.
>
> Reported-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.11
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h   |  1 +
>  arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c               | 10 ++++++++++
>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c     |  4 ++--
>  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c |  8 ++++++++
>  4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
> index d5b11037401d..5e9b33cbac51 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_asm.h
> @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@
>  #define __KVM_HOST_SMCCC_FUNC___pkvm_cpu_set_vector		18
>  #define __KVM_HOST_SMCCC_FUNC___pkvm_prot_finalize		19
>  #define __KVM_HOST_SMCCC_FUNC___pkvm_mark_hyp			20
> +#define __KVM_HOST_SMCCC_FUNC___kvm_adjust_pc			21
>  
>  #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>  
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> index 1cb39c0803a4..d62a7041ebd1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
> @@ -897,6 +897,16 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  
>  	kvm_sigset_deactivate(vcpu);
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * In the unlikely event that we are returning to userspace
> +	 * with pending exceptions or PC adjustment, commit these

I'm going to assume "PC adjustment" means the KVM_ARM64_INCREMENT_PC flag. Please
correct me if that's not true, but if that's the case, then the flag isn't handled
below.

> +	 * adjustments in order to give userspace a consistent view of
> +	 * the vcpu state.
> +	 */
> +	if (unlikely(vcpu->arch.flags & (KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION |
> +					 KVM_ARM64_EXCEPT_MASK)))

The condition seems to suggest that it is valid to set
KVM_ARM64_EXCEPT_{AA32,AA64}_* without setting KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION, which
looks rather odd to me. Is that a valid use of the KVM_ARM64_EXCEPT_MASK bits? If
it's not (the existing code always sets the exception type with the
KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION), that I was thinking that checking only the
KVM_ARM64_PENDING_EXCEPTION flag would make the intention clearer.

Thanks,

Alex

> +		kvm_call_hyp(__kvm_adjust_pc, vcpu);
> +
>  	vcpu_put(vcpu);
>  	return ret;
>  }
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c
> index 0812a496725f..11541b94b328 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/exception.c
> @@ -331,8 +331,8 @@ static void kvm_inject_exception(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  }
>  
>  /*
> - * Adjust the guest PC on entry, depending on flags provided by EL1
> - * for the purpose of emulation (MMIO, sysreg) or exception injection.
> + * Adjust the guest PC (and potentially exception state) depending on
> + * flags provided by the emulation code.
>   */
>  void __kvm_adjust_pc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  {
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c
> index f36420a80474..1632f001f4ed 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/hyp-main.c
> @@ -28,6 +28,13 @@ static void handle___kvm_vcpu_run(struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt)
>  	cpu_reg(host_ctxt, 1) =  __kvm_vcpu_run(kern_hyp_va(vcpu));
>  }
>  
> +static void handle___kvm_adjust_pc(struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt)
> +{
> +	DECLARE_REG(struct kvm_vcpu *, vcpu, host_ctxt, 1);
> +
> +	__kvm_adjust_pc(kern_hyp_va(vcpu));
> +}
> +
>  static void handle___kvm_flush_vm_context(struct kvm_cpu_context *host_ctxt)
>  {
>  	__kvm_flush_vm_context();
> @@ -170,6 +177,7 @@ typedef void (*hcall_t)(struct kvm_cpu_context *);
>  
>  static const hcall_t host_hcall[] = {
>  	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_vcpu_run),
> +	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_adjust_pc),
>  	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_flush_vm_context),
>  	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_tlb_flush_vmid_ipa),
>  	HANDLE_FUNC(__kvm_tlb_flush_vmid),

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

  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-10 14:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-10  9:49 [PATCH 0/2] KVM: arm64: Fixup PC updates on exit to userspace Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10  9:49 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10  9:49 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10  9:49 ` [PATCH 1/2] KVM: arm64: Move __adjust_pc out of line Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10  9:49   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10  9:49   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10 14:55   ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-05-10 14:55     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-05-10 14:55     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-05-10 15:08     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10 15:08       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10 15:08       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10  9:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] KVM: arm64: Commit pending PC adjustemnts before returning to userspace Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10  9:49   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10  9:49   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10 14:55   ` Alexandru Elisei [this message]
2021-05-10 14:55     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-05-10 14:55     ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-05-10 15:04     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10 15:04       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10 15:04       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10 15:14       ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-05-10 15:14         ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-05-10 15:14         ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-05-11  7:44         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-11  7:44           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-11  7:44           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-11 16:50           ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-05-11 16:50             ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-05-11 16:50             ` Alexandru Elisei
2021-05-11  8:03   ` Fuad Tabba
2021-05-11  8:03     ` Fuad Tabba
2021-05-11  8:03     ` Fuad Tabba
2021-05-11  8:14     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-11  8:14       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-11  8:14       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-11  8:22       ` Fuad Tabba
2021-05-11  8:22         ` Fuad Tabba
2021-05-11  8:22         ` Fuad Tabba
2021-05-11  8:45         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-11  8:45           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-11  8:45           ` Marc Zyngier

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=7a0f43c8-cc36-810e-0b8e-ffe66672ca82@arm.com \
    --to=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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.