All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: "Guangming.Cao" <guangming.cao@mediatek.com>
Cc: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	"Ruhl, Michael J" <michael.j.ruhl@intel.com>,
	"sumit.semwal@linaro.org" <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"wsd_upstream@mediatek.com" <wsd_upstream@mediatek.com>,
	"libo.kang@mediatek.com" <libo.kang@mediatek.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"yf.wang@mediatek.com" <yf.wang@mediatek.com>,
	"linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org>,
	"linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
	"lmark@codeaurora.org" <lmark@codeaurora.org>,
	"benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org" <benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org>,
	"bo.song@mediatek.com" <bo.song@mediatek.com>,
	"matthias.bgg@gmail.com" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	"labbott@redhat.com" <labbott@redhat.com>,
	"mingyuan.ma@mediatek.com" <mingyuan.ma@mediatek.com>,
	"jianjiao.zeng@mediatek.com" <jianjiao.zeng@mediatek.com>,
	"linux-media@vger.kernel.org" <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] dma-buf: dma-heap: Add a size check for allocation
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 17:17:39 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALAqxLUSjHoLpgFLcvqmDfv7Uip2VwHS5d_5x2nzw=P3rA2NDA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <82faa62f1bc946cf2f9ee2f7d15c567162238eab.camel@mediatek.com>

On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 4:04 AM Guangming.Cao
<guangming.cao@mediatek.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2022-01-14 at 08:16 +0100, Christian König wrote:
> > Am 14.01.22 um 00:26 schrieb John Stultz:
> > > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 5:05 AM Christian König
> > > <christian.koenig@amd.com> wrote:
> > > > Am 13.01.22 um 14:00 schrieb Ruhl, Michael J:
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: dri-devel <dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On
> > > > > > Behalf Of
> > > > > > Ruhl, Michael J
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: dri-devel <dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
> > > > > > > On Behalf Of
> > > > > > > guangming.cao@mediatek.com
> > > > > > > +   /*
> > > > > > > +    * Invalid size check. The "len" should be less than
> > > > > > > totalram.
> > > > > > > +    *
> > > > > > > +    * Without this check, once the invalid size allocation
> > > > > > > runs on a process
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > +    * can't be killed by OOM flow(such as "gralloc" on
> > > > > > > Android devices), it
> > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > +    * cause a kernel exception, and to make matters worse,
> > > > > > > we can't find
> > > > > > > who are using
> > > > > > > +    * so many memory with "dma_buf_debug_show" since the
> > > > > > > relevant
> > > > > > > dma-buf hasn't exported.
> > > > > > > +    */
> > > > > > > +   if (len >> PAGE_SHIFT > totalram_pages())
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If your "heap" is from cma, is this still a valid check?
> > > > >
> > > > > And thinking a bit further, if I create a heap from something
> > > > > else (say device memory),
> > > > > you will need to be able to figure out the maximum allowable
> > > > > check for the specific
> > > > > heap.
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe the heap needs a callback for max size?
> Yes, I agree with this solution.
> If dma-heap framework support this via adding a callback to support it,
> seems it's more clear than adding a limitation in dma-heap framework
> since each heap maybe has different limitation.
> If you prefer adding callback, I can update this patch and add totalram
> limitation to system dma-heap.

If the max value is per-heap, why not enforce that value in the
per-heap allocation function?

Moving the check to the heap alloc to me seems simpler to me than
adding complexity to the infrastructure to add a heap max_size
callback. Is there some other use for the callback that you envision?

thanks
-john

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: "Guangming.Cao" <guangming.cao@mediatek.com>
Cc: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	"Ruhl, Michael J" <michael.j.ruhl@intel.com>,
	"sumit.semwal@linaro.org" <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"wsd_upstream@mediatek.com" <wsd_upstream@mediatek.com>,
	"libo.kang@mediatek.com" <libo.kang@mediatek.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"yf.wang@mediatek.com" <yf.wang@mediatek.com>,
	"linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org>,
	"linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
	"lmark@codeaurora.org" <lmark@codeaurora.org>,
	"benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org" <benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org>,
	"bo.song@mediatek.com" <bo.song@mediatek.com>,
	"matthias.bgg@gmail.com" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	"labbott@redhat.com" <labbott@redhat.com>,
	"mingyuan.ma@mediatek.com" <mingyuan.ma@mediatek.com>,
	"jianjiao.zeng@mediatek.com" <jianjiao.zeng@mediatek.com>,
	"linux-media@vger.kernel.org" <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] dma-buf: dma-heap: Add a size check for allocation
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 17:17:39 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALAqxLUSjHoLpgFLcvqmDfv7Uip2VwHS5d_5x2nzw=P3rA2NDA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <82faa62f1bc946cf2f9ee2f7d15c567162238eab.camel@mediatek.com>

On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 4:04 AM Guangming.Cao
<guangming.cao@mediatek.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2022-01-14 at 08:16 +0100, Christian König wrote:
> > Am 14.01.22 um 00:26 schrieb John Stultz:
> > > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 5:05 AM Christian König
> > > <christian.koenig@amd.com> wrote:
> > > > Am 13.01.22 um 14:00 schrieb Ruhl, Michael J:
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: dri-devel <dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On
> > > > > > Behalf Of
> > > > > > Ruhl, Michael J
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: dri-devel <dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
> > > > > > > On Behalf Of
> > > > > > > guangming.cao@mediatek.com
> > > > > > > +   /*
> > > > > > > +    * Invalid size check. The "len" should be less than
> > > > > > > totalram.
> > > > > > > +    *
> > > > > > > +    * Without this check, once the invalid size allocation
> > > > > > > runs on a process
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > +    * can't be killed by OOM flow(such as "gralloc" on
> > > > > > > Android devices), it
> > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > +    * cause a kernel exception, and to make matters worse,
> > > > > > > we can't find
> > > > > > > who are using
> > > > > > > +    * so many memory with "dma_buf_debug_show" since the
> > > > > > > relevant
> > > > > > > dma-buf hasn't exported.
> > > > > > > +    */
> > > > > > > +   if (len >> PAGE_SHIFT > totalram_pages())
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If your "heap" is from cma, is this still a valid check?
> > > > >
> > > > > And thinking a bit further, if I create a heap from something
> > > > > else (say device memory),
> > > > > you will need to be able to figure out the maximum allowable
> > > > > check for the specific
> > > > > heap.
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe the heap needs a callback for max size?
> Yes, I agree with this solution.
> If dma-heap framework support this via adding a callback to support it,
> seems it's more clear than adding a limitation in dma-heap framework
> since each heap maybe has different limitation.
> If you prefer adding callback, I can update this patch and add totalram
> limitation to system dma-heap.

If the max value is per-heap, why not enforce that value in the
per-heap allocation function?

Moving the check to the heap alloc to me seems simpler to me than
adding complexity to the infrastructure to add a heap max_size
callback. Is there some other use for the callback that you envision?

thanks
-john

_______________________________________________
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: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: "Guangming.Cao" <guangming.cao@mediatek.com>
Cc: "jianjiao.zeng@mediatek.com" <jianjiao.zeng@mediatek.com>,
	"lmark@codeaurora.org" <lmark@codeaurora.org>,
	"wsd_upstream@mediatek.com" <wsd_upstream@mediatek.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"libo.kang@mediatek.com" <libo.kang@mediatek.com>,
	"linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org>,
	"Ruhl, Michael J" <michael.j.ruhl@intel.com>,
	"yf.wang@mediatek.com" <yf.wang@mediatek.com>,
	"linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
	"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org" <benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org>,
	"bo.song@mediatek.com" <bo.song@mediatek.com>,
	"matthias.bgg@gmail.com" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	"mingyuan.ma@mediatek.com" <mingyuan.ma@mediatek.com>,
	"labbott@redhat.com" <labbott@redhat.com>,
	"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-media@vger.kernel.org" <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] dma-buf: dma-heap: Add a size check for allocation
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 17:17:39 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALAqxLUSjHoLpgFLcvqmDfv7Uip2VwHS5d_5x2nzw=P3rA2NDA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <82faa62f1bc946cf2f9ee2f7d15c567162238eab.camel@mediatek.com>

On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 4:04 AM Guangming.Cao
<guangming.cao@mediatek.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2022-01-14 at 08:16 +0100, Christian König wrote:
> > Am 14.01.22 um 00:26 schrieb John Stultz:
> > > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 5:05 AM Christian König
> > > <christian.koenig@amd.com> wrote:
> > > > Am 13.01.22 um 14:00 schrieb Ruhl, Michael J:
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: dri-devel <dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On
> > > > > > Behalf Of
> > > > > > Ruhl, Michael J
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: dri-devel <dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
> > > > > > > On Behalf Of
> > > > > > > guangming.cao@mediatek.com
> > > > > > > +   /*
> > > > > > > +    * Invalid size check. The "len" should be less than
> > > > > > > totalram.
> > > > > > > +    *
> > > > > > > +    * Without this check, once the invalid size allocation
> > > > > > > runs on a process
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > +    * can't be killed by OOM flow(such as "gralloc" on
> > > > > > > Android devices), it
> > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > +    * cause a kernel exception, and to make matters worse,
> > > > > > > we can't find
> > > > > > > who are using
> > > > > > > +    * so many memory with "dma_buf_debug_show" since the
> > > > > > > relevant
> > > > > > > dma-buf hasn't exported.
> > > > > > > +    */
> > > > > > > +   if (len >> PAGE_SHIFT > totalram_pages())
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If your "heap" is from cma, is this still a valid check?
> > > > >
> > > > > And thinking a bit further, if I create a heap from something
> > > > > else (say device memory),
> > > > > you will need to be able to figure out the maximum allowable
> > > > > check for the specific
> > > > > heap.
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe the heap needs a callback for max size?
> Yes, I agree with this solution.
> If dma-heap framework support this via adding a callback to support it,
> seems it's more clear than adding a limitation in dma-heap framework
> since each heap maybe has different limitation.
> If you prefer adding callback, I can update this patch and add totalram
> limitation to system dma-heap.

If the max value is per-heap, why not enforce that value in the
per-heap allocation function?

Moving the check to the heap alloc to me seems simpler to me than
adding complexity to the infrastructure to add a heap max_size
callback. Is there some other use for the callback that you envision?

thanks
-john

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: "Guangming.Cao" <guangming.cao@mediatek.com>
Cc: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>,
	"Ruhl, Michael J" <michael.j.ruhl@intel.com>,
	"sumit.semwal@linaro.org" <sumit.semwal@linaro.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"wsd_upstream@mediatek.com" <wsd_upstream@mediatek.com>,
	"libo.kang@mediatek.com" <libo.kang@mediatek.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"yf.wang@mediatek.com" <yf.wang@mediatek.com>,
	"linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org>,
	"linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
	"lmark@codeaurora.org" <lmark@codeaurora.org>,
	"benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org" <benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org>,
	"bo.song@mediatek.com" <bo.song@mediatek.com>,
	"matthias.bgg@gmail.com" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	"labbott@redhat.com" <labbott@redhat.com>,
	"mingyuan.ma@mediatek.com" <mingyuan.ma@mediatek.com>,
	"jianjiao.zeng@mediatek.com" <jianjiao.zeng@mediatek.com>,
	"linux-media@vger.kernel.org" <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] dma-buf: dma-heap: Add a size check for allocation
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 17:17:39 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALAqxLUSjHoLpgFLcvqmDfv7Uip2VwHS5d_5x2nzw=P3rA2NDA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <82faa62f1bc946cf2f9ee2f7d15c567162238eab.camel@mediatek.com>

On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 4:04 AM Guangming.Cao
<guangming.cao@mediatek.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2022-01-14 at 08:16 +0100, Christian König wrote:
> > Am 14.01.22 um 00:26 schrieb John Stultz:
> > > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 5:05 AM Christian König
> > > <christian.koenig@amd.com> wrote:
> > > > Am 13.01.22 um 14:00 schrieb Ruhl, Michael J:
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: dri-devel <dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On
> > > > > > Behalf Of
> > > > > > Ruhl, Michael J
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: dri-devel <dri-devel-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
> > > > > > > On Behalf Of
> > > > > > > guangming.cao@mediatek.com
> > > > > > > +   /*
> > > > > > > +    * Invalid size check. The "len" should be less than
> > > > > > > totalram.
> > > > > > > +    *
> > > > > > > +    * Without this check, once the invalid size allocation
> > > > > > > runs on a process
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > +    * can't be killed by OOM flow(such as "gralloc" on
> > > > > > > Android devices), it
> > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > +    * cause a kernel exception, and to make matters worse,
> > > > > > > we can't find
> > > > > > > who are using
> > > > > > > +    * so many memory with "dma_buf_debug_show" since the
> > > > > > > relevant
> > > > > > > dma-buf hasn't exported.
> > > > > > > +    */
> > > > > > > +   if (len >> PAGE_SHIFT > totalram_pages())
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If your "heap" is from cma, is this still a valid check?
> > > > >
> > > > > And thinking a bit further, if I create a heap from something
> > > > > else (say device memory),
> > > > > you will need to be able to figure out the maximum allowable
> > > > > check for the specific
> > > > > heap.
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe the heap needs a callback for max size?
> Yes, I agree with this solution.
> If dma-heap framework support this via adding a callback to support it,
> seems it's more clear than adding a limitation in dma-heap framework
> since each heap maybe has different limitation.
> If you prefer adding callback, I can update this patch and add totalram
> limitation to system dma-heap.

If the max value is per-heap, why not enforce that value in the
per-heap allocation function?

Moving the check to the heap alloc to me seems simpler to me than
adding complexity to the infrastructure to add a heap max_size
callback. Is there some other use for the callback that you envision?

thanks
-john

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

  reply	other threads:[~2022-01-15  1:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 93+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-17  9:41 [PATCH] dma-buf: dma-heap: Add a size limitation for allocation guangming.cao
2021-12-17  9:41 ` guangming.cao
2021-12-17  9:41 ` guangming.cao
2021-12-17  9:41 ` guangming.cao
2021-12-27  9:51 ` [PATCH v2] dma-buf: dma-heap: Add a size check " guangming.cao
2021-12-27  9:51   ` guangming.cao
2021-12-27  9:51   ` guangming.cao
2021-12-27  9:51   ` guangming.cao
2022-01-03 18:57   ` John Stultz
2022-01-03 18:57     ` John Stultz
2022-01-03 18:57     ` John Stultz
2022-01-03 18:57     ` John Stultz
2022-01-04  7:47     ` Christian König
2022-01-04  7:47       ` Christian König
2022-01-04  7:47       ` Christian König
2022-01-04  7:47       ` Christian König
2022-01-04  8:44       ` Guangming.Cao
2022-01-04  8:44         ` Guangming.Cao
2022-01-04  8:44         ` Guangming.Cao
2022-01-05  6:36       ` guangming.cao
2022-01-05  6:36         ` guangming.cao
2022-01-05  6:36         ` guangming.cao
2022-01-05  6:36         ` guangming.cao
2022-01-13 10:50         ` Sumit Semwal
2022-01-13 10:50           ` Sumit Semwal
2022-01-13 10:50           ` Sumit Semwal
2022-01-13 10:50           ` Sumit Semwal
2022-01-13 12:34           ` [PATCH v3] " guangming.cao
2022-01-13 12:34             ` guangming.cao
2022-01-13 12:34             ` guangming.cao
2022-01-13 12:34             ` guangming.cao
2022-01-13 12:57             ` Ruhl, Michael J
2022-01-13 12:57               ` Ruhl, Michael J
2022-01-13 12:57               ` Ruhl, Michael J
2022-01-13 12:57               ` Ruhl, Michael J
2022-01-13 13:00               ` Ruhl, Michael J
2022-01-13 13:00                 ` Ruhl, Michael J
2022-01-13 13:00                 ` Ruhl, Michael J
2022-01-13 13:00                 ` Ruhl, Michael J
2022-01-13 13:05                 ` Christian König
2022-01-13 13:05                   ` Christian König
2022-01-13 13:05                   ` Christian König
2022-01-13 13:05                   ` Christian König
2022-01-13 23:26                   ` John Stultz
2022-01-13 23:26                     ` John Stultz
2022-01-13 23:26                     ` John Stultz
2022-01-13 23:26                     ` John Stultz
2022-01-14  7:16                     ` Christian König
2022-01-14  7:16                       ` Christian König
2022-01-14  7:16                       ` Christian König
2022-01-14  7:16                       ` Christian König
2022-01-14 12:05                       ` Guangming.Cao
2022-01-14 12:05                         ` Guangming.Cao
2022-01-14 12:05                         ` Guangming.Cao
2022-01-15  1:17                         ` John Stultz [this message]
2022-01-15  1:17                           ` John Stultz
2022-01-15  1:17                           ` John Stultz
2022-01-15  1:17                           ` John Stultz
2022-01-19  9:59                           ` Guangming.Cao
2022-01-19  9:59                             ` Guangming.Cao
2022-01-19  9:59                             ` Guangming.Cao
2022-01-19 20:37                             ` John Stultz
2022-01-19 20:37                               ` John Stultz
2022-01-19 20:37                               ` John Stultz
2022-01-19 20:37                               ` John Stultz
2022-01-20  3:34                               ` [PATCH v4] dma-buf: system_heap: " guangming.cao
2022-01-20  3:34                                 ` guangming.cao
2022-01-20  3:34                                 ` guangming.cao
2022-01-20  3:34                                 ` guangming.cao
2022-01-20  3:48                                 ` John Stultz
2022-01-20  3:48                                   ` John Stultz
2022-01-20  3:48                                   ` John Stultz
2022-01-20  3:48                                   ` John Stultz
2022-01-20  7:08                                   ` [PATCH v5] " guangming.cao
2022-01-20  7:08                                     ` guangming.cao
2022-01-20  7:08                                     ` guangming.cao
2022-01-20  7:08                                     ` guangming.cao
2022-01-20  8:27                                     ` Christian König
2022-01-20  8:27                                       ` Christian König
2022-01-20  8:27                                       ` Christian König
2022-01-20  8:27                                       ` Christian König
2022-01-20  8:52                                       ` [PATCH v6] " guangming.cao
2022-01-20  8:52                                         ` guangming.cao
2022-01-20  8:52                                         ` guangming.cao
2022-01-20  8:52                                         ` guangming.cao
2022-01-20 10:00                                         ` [PATCH v6 RESEND] " guangming.cao
2022-01-20 10:00                                           ` guangming.cao
2022-01-20 10:00                                           ` guangming.cao
2022-01-20 10:00                                           ` guangming.cao
2022-01-20 10:22                                           ` Christian König
2022-01-20 10:22                                             ` Christian König
2022-01-20 10:22                                             ` Christian König
2022-01-20 10:22                                             ` Christian König

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='CALAqxLUSjHoLpgFLcvqmDfv7Uip2VwHS5d_5x2nzw=P3rA2NDA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=john.stultz@linaro.org \
    --cc=benjamin.gaignard@linaro.org \
    --cc=bo.song@mediatek.com \
    --cc=christian.koenig@amd.com \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=guangming.cao@mediatek.com \
    --cc=jianjiao.zeng@mediatek.com \
    --cc=labbott@redhat.com \
    --cc=libo.kang@mediatek.com \
    --cc=linaro-mm-sig@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=lmark@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
    --cc=michael.j.ruhl@intel.com \
    --cc=mingyuan.ma@mediatek.com \
    --cc=sumit.semwal@linaro.org \
    --cc=wsd_upstream@mediatek.com \
    --cc=yf.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.