All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>,
	Jia He <justin.he@arm.com>,
	Harb Abdulhamid <harb@amperecomputing.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Robert Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>,
	Erik Kaneda <erik.kaneda@intel.com>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:ACPI COMPONENT ARCHITECTURE (ACPICA)"
	<devel@acpica.org>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Revert "ACPI: Add memory semantics to acpi_os_map_memory()"
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 09:30:45 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YVSUtTunKrk+nZcO@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210929133131.GA20191@lpieralisi>

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 02:31:31PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> [+Tony]
> 
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 07:26:52PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On 9/24/2021 11:04 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 02:54:52PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 2:26 PM Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > > > > > From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
> > > > > > Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 13:05:05 +0200
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:40 AM Lorenzo Pieralisi
> > > > > > <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 01:09:58AM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 17:33:36 +0100
> > > > > > > > > From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 10:32:23PM +0800, Jia He wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > This reverts commit 437b38c51162f8b87beb28a833c4d5dc85fa864e.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > After this commit, a boot panic is alway hit on an Ampere EMAG server
> > > > > > > > > > with call trace as follows:
> > > > > > > > > >   Internal error: synchronous external abort: 96000410 [#1] SMP
> > > > > > > > > >   Modules linked in:
> > > > > > > > > >   CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.14.0+ #462
> > > > > > > > > >   Hardware name: MiTAC RAPTOR EV-883832-X3-0001/RAPTOR, BIOS 0.14 02/22/2019
> > > > > > > > > >   pstate: 60000005 (nZCv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
> > > > > > > > > > [...snip...]
> > > > > > > > > >   Call trace:
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_system_memory_space_handler+0x26c/0x2c8
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ev_address_space_dispatch+0x228/0x2c4
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_access_region+0x114/0x268
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_field_datum_io+0x128/0x1b8
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_extract_from_field+0x14c/0x2ac
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_read_data_from_field+0x190/0x1b8
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_resolve_node_to_value+0x1ec/0x288
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_resolve_to_value+0x250/0x274
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ds_evaluate_name_path+0xac/0x124
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ds_exec_end_op+0x90/0x410
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ps_parse_loop+0x4ac/0x5d8
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ps_parse_aml+0xe0/0x2c8
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ps_execute_method+0x19c/0x1ac
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ns_evaluate+0x1f8/0x26c
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ns_init_one_device+0x104/0x140
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ns_walk_namespace+0x158/0x1d0
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ns_initialize_devices+0x194/0x218
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_initialize_objects+0x48/0x50
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_init+0xe0/0x498
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > As mentioned by Lorenzo:
> > > > > > > > > >    "We are forcing memory semantics mappings to PROT_NORMAL_NC, which
> > > > > > > > > >    eMAG does not like at all and I'd need to understand why. It looks
> > > > > > > > > >    like the issue happen in SystemMemory Opregion handler."
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Hence just revert it before everything is clear.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Fixes: 437b38c51162 ("ACPI: Add memory semantics to acpi_os_map_memory()")
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: Harb Abdulhamid <harb@amperecomputing.com>
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jia He <justin.he@arm.com>
> > > > > > > > > Rewrote the commit log, please take the patch below and repost
> > > > > > > > > it as a v3.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > It would still be great if Ampere can help us understand why
> > > > > > > > > the NormalNC attributes trigger a sync abort on the opregion
> > > > > > > > > before merging it.
> > > > > > > > To be honest, I don't think you really need an explanation from Ampere
> > > > > > > > here.  Mapping a part of the address space that doesn't provide memory
> > > > > > > > semantics with NormalNC attributes is wrong and triggering a sync
> > > > > > > > abort in that case is way better than silently ignoring the access.
> > > > > > > That's understood and that's what I explained in the revert commit
> > > > > > > log, no question about it.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I was just asking to confirm if that's what's actually happening.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Putting my OpenBSD hat on (where we have our own ACPI OSPM
> > > > > > > > implementation) I must say that we always interpreted SystemMemory as
> > > > > > > > memory mapped IO and I think that is a logical choice as SystemIO is
> > > > > > > > used for (non-memory mapped) IO.  And I'd say that the ACPI OSPM code
> > > > > > > > should make sure that it uses properly aligned access to any Field
> > > > > > > > object that doesn't use AnyAcc as its access type.  Even on x86!  And
> > > > > > > > I'd say that AML that uses AnyAcc fields for SystemMemory OpRegions on
> > > > > > > > arm64 is buggy.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > But maybe relaxing this when the EFI memory map indicates that the
> > > > > > > > address space in question does provide memory semantics does make
> > > > > > > > sense.  That should defenitely be documented in the ACPI standard
> > > > > > > > though.
> > > > > > > Mapping SystemMemory Opregions as "memory" does not make sense
> > > > > > > at all to me. Still, that's what Linux ACPICA code does (*if*
> > > > > > > that's what acpi_os_map_memory() is supposed to mean).
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/20210916160827.GA4525@lpieralisi
> > > > > > It doesn't need to do that, though, if there are good enough arguments
> > > > > > to change the current behavior (and the argument here is that it may
> > > > > > be an MMIO region, so mapping it as memory doesn't really work, but it
> > > > > > also may be a region in memory - there is no rule in the spec by which
> > > > > > SystemMemory Opregions cannot be "memory" AFAICS) and if that change
> > > > > > doesn't introduce regressions in the installed base.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Where do we go from here, to be defined, we still have a bug
> > > > > > > to fix after the revert is applied.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > drivers/acpi/sysfs.c
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > maps BERT error regions with acpi_os_map_memory().
> > > > > > That mechanism is basically used for exporting ACPI tables to user
> > > > > > space and they are known to reside in memory.  Whether or not BERT
> > > > > > regions should be mapped in the same way is a good question.
> > > > > It is not inconceivable that BERT regions actually live in memory of
> > > > > the BMC that is exposed over a bus that doesn't implement memory
> > > > > semantics is it?
> > > > No, it isn't, which is why I think that mapping them as RAM may not be
> > > > a good idea in general.
> > > Should I patch acpi_data_show() to map BERT error regions (well, that's
> > > what acpi_data_show() is used on at the moment) as MMIO and use the
> > > related memcpy routine to read them then :) ?
> > 
> > It actually would be good to clean it up so it is clear that this is only
> > used for BERT.
> > 
> > And then there is this question: if this is not RAM (so effectively it is
> > device memory), should it be exposed directly to user space?
> 
> Do you mean from a security standpoint ? I believe there might be users
> out there so if we want to remove that sysfs entry it may be
> problematic.
> 
> Maybe Tony has more insights into this than I do:
> 
> commit 7dae6326ed76 ("ACPI / sysfs: Extend ACPI sysfs to provide access to boot error region")
> 
> Thanks,
> Lorenzo

There are definelty users of /sys/firmware/acpi/tables/data/BERT.

If there is a concern about mapping the original BIOS memory to
provide this entry, then we need to allocate kernel memory and make
a copy that appears in the blob exported to /sys.

-Tony

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>,
	Jia He <justin.he@arm.com>,
	Harb Abdulhamid <harb@amperecomputing.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	Robert Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>,
	Erik Kaneda <erik.kaneda@intel.com>,
	Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:ACPI COMPONENT ARCHITECTURE (ACPICA)"
	<devel@acpica.org>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Revert "ACPI: Add memory semantics to acpi_os_map_memory()"
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 09:30:45 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YVSUtTunKrk+nZcO@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210929133131.GA20191@lpieralisi>

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 02:31:31PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> [+Tony]
> 
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 07:26:52PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On 9/24/2021 11:04 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 02:54:52PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 2:26 PM Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > > > > > From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
> > > > > > Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 13:05:05 +0200
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:40 AM Lorenzo Pieralisi
> > > > > > <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 01:09:58AM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 17:33:36 +0100
> > > > > > > > > From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 10:32:23PM +0800, Jia He wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > This reverts commit 437b38c51162f8b87beb28a833c4d5dc85fa864e.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > After this commit, a boot panic is alway hit on an Ampere EMAG server
> > > > > > > > > > with call trace as follows:
> > > > > > > > > >   Internal error: synchronous external abort: 96000410 [#1] SMP
> > > > > > > > > >   Modules linked in:
> > > > > > > > > >   CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.14.0+ #462
> > > > > > > > > >   Hardware name: MiTAC RAPTOR EV-883832-X3-0001/RAPTOR, BIOS 0.14 02/22/2019
> > > > > > > > > >   pstate: 60000005 (nZCv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
> > > > > > > > > > [...snip...]
> > > > > > > > > >   Call trace:
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_system_memory_space_handler+0x26c/0x2c8
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ev_address_space_dispatch+0x228/0x2c4
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_access_region+0x114/0x268
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_field_datum_io+0x128/0x1b8
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_extract_from_field+0x14c/0x2ac
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_read_data_from_field+0x190/0x1b8
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_resolve_node_to_value+0x1ec/0x288
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ex_resolve_to_value+0x250/0x274
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ds_evaluate_name_path+0xac/0x124
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ds_exec_end_op+0x90/0x410
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ps_parse_loop+0x4ac/0x5d8
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ps_parse_aml+0xe0/0x2c8
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ps_execute_method+0x19c/0x1ac
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ns_evaluate+0x1f8/0x26c
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ns_init_one_device+0x104/0x140
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ns_walk_namespace+0x158/0x1d0
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_ns_initialize_devices+0x194/0x218
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_initialize_objects+0x48/0x50
> > > > > > > > > >    acpi_init+0xe0/0x498
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > As mentioned by Lorenzo:
> > > > > > > > > >    "We are forcing memory semantics mappings to PROT_NORMAL_NC, which
> > > > > > > > > >    eMAG does not like at all and I'd need to understand why. It looks
> > > > > > > > > >    like the issue happen in SystemMemory Opregion handler."
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Hence just revert it before everything is clear.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Fixes: 437b38c51162 ("ACPI: Add memory semantics to acpi_os_map_memory()")
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: Harb Abdulhamid <harb@amperecomputing.com>
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jia He <justin.he@arm.com>
> > > > > > > > > Rewrote the commit log, please take the patch below and repost
> > > > > > > > > it as a v3.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > It would still be great if Ampere can help us understand why
> > > > > > > > > the NormalNC attributes trigger a sync abort on the opregion
> > > > > > > > > before merging it.
> > > > > > > > To be honest, I don't think you really need an explanation from Ampere
> > > > > > > > here.  Mapping a part of the address space that doesn't provide memory
> > > > > > > > semantics with NormalNC attributes is wrong and triggering a sync
> > > > > > > > abort in that case is way better than silently ignoring the access.
> > > > > > > That's understood and that's what I explained in the revert commit
> > > > > > > log, no question about it.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I was just asking to confirm if that's what's actually happening.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Putting my OpenBSD hat on (where we have our own ACPI OSPM
> > > > > > > > implementation) I must say that we always interpreted SystemMemory as
> > > > > > > > memory mapped IO and I think that is a logical choice as SystemIO is
> > > > > > > > used for (non-memory mapped) IO.  And I'd say that the ACPI OSPM code
> > > > > > > > should make sure that it uses properly aligned access to any Field
> > > > > > > > object that doesn't use AnyAcc as its access type.  Even on x86!  And
> > > > > > > > I'd say that AML that uses AnyAcc fields for SystemMemory OpRegions on
> > > > > > > > arm64 is buggy.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > But maybe relaxing this when the EFI memory map indicates that the
> > > > > > > > address space in question does provide memory semantics does make
> > > > > > > > sense.  That should defenitely be documented in the ACPI standard
> > > > > > > > though.
> > > > > > > Mapping SystemMemory Opregions as "memory" does not make sense
> > > > > > > at all to me. Still, that's what Linux ACPICA code does (*if*
> > > > > > > that's what acpi_os_map_memory() is supposed to mean).
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/20210916160827.GA4525@lpieralisi
> > > > > > It doesn't need to do that, though, if there are good enough arguments
> > > > > > to change the current behavior (and the argument here is that it may
> > > > > > be an MMIO region, so mapping it as memory doesn't really work, but it
> > > > > > also may be a region in memory - there is no rule in the spec by which
> > > > > > SystemMemory Opregions cannot be "memory" AFAICS) and if that change
> > > > > > doesn't introduce regressions in the installed base.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Where do we go from here, to be defined, we still have a bug
> > > > > > > to fix after the revert is applied.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > drivers/acpi/sysfs.c
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > maps BERT error regions with acpi_os_map_memory().
> > > > > > That mechanism is basically used for exporting ACPI tables to user
> > > > > > space and they are known to reside in memory.  Whether or not BERT
> > > > > > regions should be mapped in the same way is a good question.
> > > > > It is not inconceivable that BERT regions actually live in memory of
> > > > > the BMC that is exposed over a bus that doesn't implement memory
> > > > > semantics is it?
> > > > No, it isn't, which is why I think that mapping them as RAM may not be
> > > > a good idea in general.
> > > Should I patch acpi_data_show() to map BERT error regions (well, that's
> > > what acpi_data_show() is used on at the moment) as MMIO and use the
> > > related memcpy routine to read them then :) ?
> > 
> > It actually would be good to clean it up so it is clear that this is only
> > used for BERT.
> > 
> > And then there is this question: if this is not RAM (so effectively it is
> > device memory), should it be exposed directly to user space?
> 
> Do you mean from a security standpoint ? I believe there might be users
> out there so if we want to remove that sysfs entry it may be
> problematic.
> 
> Maybe Tony has more insights into this than I do:
> 
> commit 7dae6326ed76 ("ACPI / sysfs: Extend ACPI sysfs to provide access to boot error region")
> 
> Thanks,
> Lorenzo

There are definelty users of /sys/firmware/acpi/tables/data/BERT.

If there is a concern about mapping the original BIOS memory to
provide this entry, then we need to allocate kernel memory and make
a copy that appears in the blob exported to /sys.

-Tony

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

  reply	other threads:[~2021-09-29 16:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-10 12:28 [PATCH] Revert "ACPI: Add memory semantics to acpi_os_map_memory()" Jia He
2021-09-10 12:28 ` Jia He
2021-09-10 13:54 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-10 13:54   ` [Devel] " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-10 13:54   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-10 14:32 ` [PATCH v2] " Jia He
2021-09-10 14:32   ` Jia He
2021-09-10 17:28   ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-09-10 17:28     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-09-11 10:14     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-11 10:14       ` [Devel] " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-11 10:14       ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-16 16:08     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-16 16:08       ` [Devel] " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-16 16:08       ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-20 17:00       ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-20 17:00         ` [Devel] " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-20 17:00         ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-20 17:32         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-20 17:32           ` [Devel] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-20 17:32           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-21 10:05           ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-21 10:05             ` [Devel] " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-21 10:05             ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-22 11:11             ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-09-22 11:11               ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-09-22 13:07               ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-22 13:07                 ` [Devel] " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-22 13:07                 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-22 23:45               ` Jeremy Linton
2021-09-22 23:45                 ` [Devel] " Jeremy Linton
2021-09-22 23:45                 ` Jeremy Linton
2021-09-22 16:33   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-22 16:33     ` [Devel] " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-22 16:33     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-22 23:09     ` Mark Kettenis
2021-09-22 23:09       ` Mark Kettenis
2021-09-23  9:40       ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-23  9:40         ` [Devel] " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-23  9:40         ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-23 11:05         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-23 11:05           ` [Devel] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-23 11:05           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-23 12:26           ` Mark Kettenis
2021-09-23 12:26             ` Mark Kettenis
2021-09-23 12:54             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-23 12:54               ` [Devel] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-23 12:54               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-24  9:04               ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-24  9:04                 ` [Devel] " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-24  9:04                 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-28 17:26                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-28 17:26                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-09-29 13:31                   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-29 13:31                     ` [Devel] " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-29 13:31                     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-09-29 16:30                     ` Luck, Tony [this message]
2021-09-29 16:30                       ` Luck, Tony
2021-11-02 15:11                   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-11-02 15:11                     ` [Devel] " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-11-02 15:11                     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi

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=YVSUtTunKrk+nZcO@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com \
    --to=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=devel@acpica.org \
    --cc=erik.kaneda@intel.com \
    --cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
    --cc=harb@amperecomputing.com \
    --cc=justin.he@arm.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl \
    --cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=robert.moore@intel.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.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.