All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
	Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
	David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
	Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.ibm.com>,
	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
	Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
	"Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
	"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Eric Farman" <farman@linux.ibm.com>,
	Harald Freudenberger <freude@linux.ibm.com>,
	Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
	"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org" 
	<intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
	Jason Herne <jjherne@linux.ibm.com>,
	Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
	"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com>,
	"linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@linux.ibm.com>,
	Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Vivi, Rodrigo" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
	Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>,
	Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>,
	Vineeth Vijayan <vneethv@linux.ibm.com>,
	Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
	"Wang, Zhi A" <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, "Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 9/9] vfio: Remove calls to vfio_group_add_container_user()
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 02:32:08 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BN9PR11MB527672B82DCFAD2C9B28E8CC8CEE9@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220414142210.GE2120790@nvidia.com>

> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2022 10:22 PM
> 
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 09:51:49AM -0400, Matthew Rosato wrote:
> > On 4/12/22 11:53 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > When the open_device() op is called the container_users is incremented
> and
> > > held incremented until close_device(). Thus, so long as drivers call
> > > functions within their open_device()/close_device() region they do not
> > > need to worry about the container_users.
> > >
> > > These functions can all only be called between
> > > open_device()/close_device():
> > >
> > >    vfio_pin_pages()
> > >    vfio_unpin_pages()
> > >    vfio_dma_rw()
> > >    vfio_register_notifier()
> > >    vfio_unregister_notifier()
> > >
> > > So eliminate the calls to vfio_group_add_container_user() and add a
> simple
> > > WARN_ON to detect mis-use by drivers.
> > >
> >
> > vfio_device_fops_release decrements dev->open_count immediately
> before
> > calling dev->ops->close_device, which means we could enter close_device
> with
> > a dev_count of 0.
> >
> > Maybe vfio_device_fops_release should handle the same way as
> > vfio_group_get_device_fd?
> >
> > 	if (device->open_count == 1 && device->ops->close_device)
> > 		device->ops->close_device(device);
> > 	device->open_count--;
> 
> Yes, thanks alot! I have nothing to test these flows on...
> 
> It matches the ordering in the only other place to call close_device.
> 
> I folded this into the patch:

While it's a welcomed fix is it actually related to this series? The point
of this patch is that those functions are called when container_users
is non-zero. This is true even without this fix given container_users
is decremented after calling device->ops->close_device().

iiuc this might be better sent out as a separate fix out of this series?
Or at least add a comment in the commit msg about taking chance
to fix an unrelated issue to not cause confusion...

Thanks
Kevin

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
	Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
	"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com>,
	Vineeth Vijayan <vneethv@linux.ibm.com>,
	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
	"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Wang, Zhi A" <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>,
	Jason Herne <jjherne@linux.ibm.com>,
	Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>,
	Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
	Harald Freudenberger <freude@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Vivi, Rodrigo" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
	"intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.ibm.com>,
	Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>,
	Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
	Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@linux.ibm.com>,
	Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 9/9] vfio: Remove calls to vfio_group_add_container_user()
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 02:32:08 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BN9PR11MB527672B82DCFAD2C9B28E8CC8CEE9@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220414142210.GE2120790@nvidia.com>

> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2022 10:22 PM
> 
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 09:51:49AM -0400, Matthew Rosato wrote:
> > On 4/12/22 11:53 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > When the open_device() op is called the container_users is incremented
> and
> > > held incremented until close_device(). Thus, so long as drivers call
> > > functions within their open_device()/close_device() region they do not
> > > need to worry about the container_users.
> > >
> > > These functions can all only be called between
> > > open_device()/close_device():
> > >
> > >    vfio_pin_pages()
> > >    vfio_unpin_pages()
> > >    vfio_dma_rw()
> > >    vfio_register_notifier()
> > >    vfio_unregister_notifier()
> > >
> > > So eliminate the calls to vfio_group_add_container_user() and add a
> simple
> > > WARN_ON to detect mis-use by drivers.
> > >
> >
> > vfio_device_fops_release decrements dev->open_count immediately
> before
> > calling dev->ops->close_device, which means we could enter close_device
> with
> > a dev_count of 0.
> >
> > Maybe vfio_device_fops_release should handle the same way as
> > vfio_group_get_device_fd?
> >
> > 	if (device->open_count == 1 && device->ops->close_device)
> > 		device->ops->close_device(device);
> > 	device->open_count--;
> 
> Yes, thanks alot! I have nothing to test these flows on...
> 
> It matches the ordering in the only other place to call close_device.
> 
> I folded this into the patch:

While it's a welcomed fix is it actually related to this series? The point
of this patch is that those functions are called when container_users
is non-zero. This is true even without this fix given container_users
is decremented after calling device->ops->close_device().

iiuc this might be better sent out as a separate fix out of this series?
Or at least add a comment in the commit msg about taking chance
to fix an unrelated issue to not cause confusion...

Thanks
Kevin

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
	Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
	"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com>,
	Vineeth Vijayan <vneethv@linux.ibm.com>,
	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
	"intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Jason Herne <jjherne@linux.ibm.com>,
	Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>,
	Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
	Harald Freudenberger <freude@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Vivi, Rodrigo" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
	"intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.ibm.com>,
	Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
	Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@linux.ibm.com>,
	Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 9/9] vfio: Remove calls to vfio_group_add_container_user()
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2022 02:32:08 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BN9PR11MB527672B82DCFAD2C9B28E8CC8CEE9@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220414142210.GE2120790@nvidia.com>

> From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2022 10:22 PM
> 
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 09:51:49AM -0400, Matthew Rosato wrote:
> > On 4/12/22 11:53 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > When the open_device() op is called the container_users is incremented
> and
> > > held incremented until close_device(). Thus, so long as drivers call
> > > functions within their open_device()/close_device() region they do not
> > > need to worry about the container_users.
> > >
> > > These functions can all only be called between
> > > open_device()/close_device():
> > >
> > >    vfio_pin_pages()
> > >    vfio_unpin_pages()
> > >    vfio_dma_rw()
> > >    vfio_register_notifier()
> > >    vfio_unregister_notifier()
> > >
> > > So eliminate the calls to vfio_group_add_container_user() and add a
> simple
> > > WARN_ON to detect mis-use by drivers.
> > >
> >
> > vfio_device_fops_release decrements dev->open_count immediately
> before
> > calling dev->ops->close_device, which means we could enter close_device
> with
> > a dev_count of 0.
> >
> > Maybe vfio_device_fops_release should handle the same way as
> > vfio_group_get_device_fd?
> >
> > 	if (device->open_count == 1 && device->ops->close_device)
> > 		device->ops->close_device(device);
> > 	device->open_count--;
> 
> Yes, thanks alot! I have nothing to test these flows on...
> 
> It matches the ordering in the only other place to call close_device.
> 
> I folded this into the patch:

While it's a welcomed fix is it actually related to this series? The point
of this patch is that those functions are called when container_users
is non-zero. This is true even without this fix given container_users
is decremented after calling device->ops->close_device().

iiuc this might be better sent out as a separate fix out of this series?
Or at least add a comment in the commit msg about taking chance
to fix an unrelated issue to not cause confusion...

Thanks
Kevin

  reply	other threads:[~2022-04-15  2:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 141+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-12 15:53 [PATCH 0/9] Make the rest of the VFIO driver interface use vfio_device Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53 ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53 ` [PATCH 1/9] vfio: Make vfio_(un)register_notifier accept a vfio_device Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13  5:55   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13  5:55     ` [Intel-gfx] " Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13 11:39     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 11:39       ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 11:39       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 16:06       ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13 16:06         ` [Intel-gfx] " Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13 16:18         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 16:18           ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 16:18           ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 16:29           ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13 16:29             ` [Intel-gfx] " Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13 17:37             ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 17:37               ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 17:37               ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 19:17               ` Wang, Zhi A
2022-04-13 19:17                 ` [Intel-gfx] " Wang, Zhi A
2022-04-13 19:17                 ` Wang, Zhi A
2022-04-13 20:04                 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 20:04                   ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 20:04                   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 21:08                   ` [Intel-gfx] " Wang, Zhi A
2022-04-13 21:08                     ` Wang, Zhi A
2022-04-13 21:08                     ` Wang, Zhi A
2022-04-13 23:12                     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 23:12                       ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 23:12                       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-14  2:04                       ` Tian, Kevin
2022-04-14  2:04                         ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2022-04-14  2:04                         ` Tian, Kevin
2022-04-14  2:15                     ` Tian, Kevin
2022-04-14  2:15                       ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2022-04-14  2:15                       ` Tian, Kevin
2022-04-14 19:25   ` Eric Farman
2022-04-14 19:25     ` [Intel-gfx] " Eric Farman
2022-04-14 19:25     ` Eric Farman
2022-04-18 15:28   ` Tony Krowiak
2022-04-18 15:28     ` [Intel-gfx] " Tony Krowiak
2022-04-18 15:28     ` Tony Krowiak
2022-04-18 15:44     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-18 15:44       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-18 15:44       ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-18 15:52       ` Tony Krowiak
2022-04-18 15:52         ` [Intel-gfx] " Tony Krowiak
2022-04-18 15:52         ` Tony Krowiak
2022-04-18 15:29   ` Jason J. Herne
2022-04-18 15:29     ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason J. Herne
2022-04-18 15:29     ` Jason J. Herne
2022-04-12 15:53 ` [PATCH 2/9] vfio/ccw: Remove mdev from struct channel_program Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-14 19:25   ` Eric Farman
2022-04-14 19:25     ` [Intel-gfx] " Eric Farman
2022-04-14 19:25     ` Eric Farman
2022-04-12 15:53 ` [PATCH 3/9] vfio/mdev: Pass in a struct vfio_device * to vfio_pin/unpin_pages() Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13  5:57   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13  5:57     ` [Intel-gfx] " Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13 11:40     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 11:40       ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 11:40       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-14 19:26   ` Eric Farman
2022-04-14 19:26     ` [Intel-gfx] " Eric Farman
2022-04-14 19:26     ` Eric Farman
2022-04-18 15:25   ` Jason J. Herne
2022-04-18 15:25     ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason J. Herne
2022-04-18 15:25     ` Jason J. Herne
2022-04-19 17:00     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-19 17:00       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-19 17:00       ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-18 15:56   ` Tony Krowiak
2022-04-18 15:56     ` [Intel-gfx] " Tony Krowiak
2022-04-18 15:56     ` Tony Krowiak
2022-04-12 15:53 ` [PATCH 4/9] drm/i915/gvt: Change from vfio_group_(un)pin_pages to vfio_(un)pin_pages Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13  6:01   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13  6:01     ` [Intel-gfx] " Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13 13:39     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 13:39       ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 13:39       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53 ` [PATCH 5/9] vfio: Pass in a struct vfio_device * to vfio_dma_rw() Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13  6:00   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13  6:00     ` [Intel-gfx] " Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13 13:39     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 13:39       ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 13:39       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53 ` [PATCH 6/9] drm/i915/gvt: Add missing module_put() in error unwind Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13  5:59   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13  5:59     ` [Intel-gfx] " Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-12 15:53 ` [PATCH 7/9] drm/i915/gvt: Delete kvmgt_vdev::vfio_group Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53 ` [PATCH 8/9] vfio: Remove dead code Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13  6:01   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13  6:01     ` [Intel-gfx] " Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-12 15:53 ` [PATCH 9/9] vfio: Remove calls to vfio_group_add_container_user() Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-12 15:53   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13  6:11   ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13  6:11     ` [Intel-gfx] " Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13 14:03     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 14:03       ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 14:03       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-13 16:07       ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13 16:07         ` [Intel-gfx] " Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-14 13:51   ` Matthew Rosato
2022-04-14 13:51     ` [Intel-gfx] " Matthew Rosato
2022-04-14 13:51     ` Matthew Rosato
2022-04-14 14:22     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-14 14:22       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-14 14:22       ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-15  2:32       ` Tian, Kevin [this message]
2022-04-15  2:32         ` Tian, Kevin
2022-04-15  2:32         ` Tian, Kevin
2022-04-15 12:07         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-15 12:07           ` [Intel-gfx] " Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-15 12:07           ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-04-15 23:45           ` Tian, Kevin
2022-04-15 23:45             ` [Intel-gfx] " Tian, Kevin
2022-04-15 23:45             ` Tian, Kevin
2022-04-13  5:52 ` [PATCH 0/9] Make the rest of the VFIO driver interface use vfio_device Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13  5:52   ` [Intel-gfx] " Christoph Hellwig
2022-04-13 12:31 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for " Patchwork
2022-04-13 12:31 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2022-04-13 12:56 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2022-04-13 15:21 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2022-04-14 15:21 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.BUILD: failure for Make the rest of the VFIO driver interface use vfio_device (rev2) 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=BN9PR11MB527672B82DCFAD2C9B28E8CC8CEE9@BN9PR11MB5276.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=kevin.tian@intel.com \
    --cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=airlied@linux.ie \
    --cc=akrowiak@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=freude@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=jjherne@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kwankhede@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=oberpar@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --cc=svens@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=vneethv@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=yi.l.liu@intel.com \
    --cc=zhenyuw@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=zhi.a.wang@intel.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.