From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@redhat.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
Vedvyas Shanbhogue <vedvyas.shanbhogue@intel.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
x86-patch-review@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 01/27] Documentation/x86: Add CET description
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 09:57:19 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9ae1cf84-1d84-1d34-c0ce-48b0d70b8f3f@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200205181935.3712-2-yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>
> index ade4e6ec23e0..8b69ebf0baed 100644
> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -3001,6 +3001,12 @@
> noexec=on: enable non-executable mappings (default)
> noexec=off: disable non-executable mappings
>
> + no_cet_shstk [X86-64] Disable Shadow Stack for user-mode
> + applications
If we ever add kernel support, "no_cet_shstk" will mean "no cet shstk
for userspace"?
> + no_cet_ibt [X86-64] Disable Indirect Branch Tracking for user-mode
> + applications
> +
> nosmap [X86,PPC]
> Disable SMAP (Supervisor Mode Access Prevention)
> even if it is supported by processor.
BTW, this documentation is misplaced. It needs to go to the spot where
you introduce the code for these options.
> diff --git a/Documentation/x86/index.rst b/Documentation/x86/index.rst
> index a8de2fbc1caa..81f919801765 100644
> --- a/Documentation/x86/index.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/x86/index.rst
> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ x86-specific Documentation
> tlb
> mtrr
> pat
> + intel_cet
> intel_mpx
> intel-iommu
> intel_txt
> diff --git a/Documentation/x86/intel_cet.rst b/Documentation/x86/intel_cet.rst
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..71e2462fea5c
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/x86/intel_cet.rst
> @@ -0,0 +1,294 @@
> +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +
> +=========================================
> +Control-flow Enforcement Technology (CET)
> +=========================================
> +
> +[1] Overview
> +============
> +
> +Control-flow Enforcement Technology (CET) provides protection against
> +return/jump-oriented programming (ROP) attacks. It can be setup to
^ set up
> +protect both applications and the kernel. In the first phase, only
> +user-mode protection is implemented in the 64-bit kernel; 32-bit
> +applications are supported in compatibility mode.
Please just say what *is* at the time of the writing. We don't need to
talk about "phases".
Also, you haven't mentioned that this is a *hardware* feature and that
it's only on Intel CPUs at the moment. That's kinda essential. If I've
got an AMD CPU, I can just stop reading. :)
The hardware supports shadow stacks for both userspace and the kernel in
both 32 and 64-bit modes. 32-bit kernel support is not implemented.
Both 32-bit and 64-bit user applications can run on 64-bit kernels.
This is also missing the same key points about enabling as the Kconfig
text: apps don't get this for free and must be specifically enabled.
> +CET introduces Shadow Stack (SHSTK) and Indirect Branch Tracking
> +(IBT). SHSTK is a secondary stack allocated from memory and cannot
> +be directly modified by applications. When executing a CALL, the
> +processor pushes a copy of the return address to SHSTK.
... and to the normal stack
> Upon
> +function return, the processor pops the SHSTK copy and compares it
> +to the one from the program stack. If the two copies differ, the
> +processor raises a control-protection fault. IBT verifies indirect
> +CALL/JMP targets are intended as marked by the compiler with 'ENDBR'
> +opcodes (see CET instructions below).
> +
> +There are two kernel configuration options:
> +
> + X86_INTEL_SHADOW_STACK_USER, and
> + X86_INTEL_BRANCH_TRACKING_USER.
> +
> +To build a CET-enabled kernel, Binutils v2.31 and GCC v8.1 or later
> +are required.
Why are these needed to build a CET-enabled kernel?
> To build a CET-enabled application, GLIBC v2.28 or
> +later is also required.
> +
> +There are two command-line options for disabling CET features::
> +
> + no_cet_shstk - disables SHSTK, and
> + no_cet_ibt - disables IBT.
> +
> +At run time, /proc/cpuinfo shows the availability of SHSTK and IBT.
Availability of what?
If I set X86_INTEL_SHADOW_STACK_USER=n, I'll still see the cpuinfo
flags, but I won't have runtime support.
Probably best to say that cpuinfo tells you about processor support only.
> +[2] CET assembly instructions
> +=============================
Why do we need this in the kernel? What is specific to Linux or the
kernel? Why wouldn't I just go read the SDM if I want to know how the
instructions work?
> +[3] Application Enabling
> +========================
> +
> +An application's CET capability is marked in its ELF header and can
> +be verified from the following command output, in the
> +NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 field:
> +
> + readelf -n <application>
> +
> +If an application supports CET and is statically linked, it will run
> +with CET protection. If the application needs any shared libraries,
> +the loader checks all dependencies and enables CET only when all
> +requirements are met.
What about shared libraries loaded after the program starts?
> +[4] Legacy Libraries
> +====================
> +
> +GLIBC provides a few tunables for backward compatibility.
> +
> +GLIBC_TUNABLES=glibc.tune.hwcaps=-SHSTK,-IBT
> + Turn off SHSTK/IBT for the current shell.
> +
> +GLIBC_TUNABLES=glibc.tune.x86_shstk=<on, permissive>
> + This controls how dlopen() handles SHSTK legacy libraries::
> +
> + on - continue with SHSTK enabled;
> + permissive - continue with SHSTK off.
This seems like manpage fodder more than kernel documentation to me.
> +[5] CET system calls
> +====================
> +
> +The following arch_prctl() system calls are added for CET:
FWIW, I wouldn't call each of these a "system call".
"Several arch_prctl()'s have been added for CET:"
> +arch_prctl(ARCH_X86_CET_STATUS, unsigned long *addr)
> + Return CET feature status.
> +
> + The parameter 'addr' is a pointer to a user buffer.
> + On returning to the caller, the kernel fills the following
> + information::
> +
> + *addr = SHSTK/IBT status
> + *(addr + 1) = SHSTK base address
> + *(addr + 2) = SHSTK size
> +
> +arch_prctl(ARCH_X86_CET_DISABLE, unsigned long features)
> + Disable SHSTK and/or IBT specified in 'features'. Return -EPERM
> + if CET is locked.
> +
> +arch_prctl(ARCH_X86_CET_LOCK)
> + Lock in CET feature.
Shouldn't this say what "locking" means?
> +arch_prctl(ARCH_X86_CET_ALLOC_SHSTK, unsigned long *addr)
> + Allocate a new SHSTK and put a restore token at top.
> +
> + The parameter 'addr' is a pointer to a user buffer and indicates
> + the desired SHSTK size to allocate. On returning to the caller,
> + the kernel fills '*addr' with the base address of the new SHSTK.
> +arch_prctl(ARCH_X86_CET_MARK_LEGACY_CODE, unsigned long *addr)
> + Mark an address range as IBT legacy code.
> +
> + The parameter 'addr' is a pointer to a user buffer that has the
> + following information::
> +
> + *addr = starting linear address of the legacy code
> + *(addr + 1) = size of the legacy code
> + *(addr + 2) = set (1); clear (0)
> +
> +Note:
> + There is no CET-enabling arch_prctl function. By design, CET is
> + enabled automatically if the binary and the system can support it.
This is kinda interesting. It means that a JIT couldn't choose to
protect the code it generates and have different rules from itself?
> + The parameters passed are always unsigned 64-bit. When an IA32
> + application passing pointers, it should only use the lower 32 bits.
Won't a 32-bit app calling prctl() use the 32-bit ABI? How would it
even know it's running on a 64-bit kernel?
> +[6] The implementation of the SHSTK
> +===================================
> +
> +SHSTK size
> +----------
> +
> +A task's SHSTK is allocated from memory to a fixed size of
> +RLIMIT_STACK.
I can't really parse that sentence. Is this saying that shadow stacks
are limited by and share space with normal stacks via RLIMIT_STACK?
> A compat-mode thread's SHSTK size is 1/4 of
> +RLIMIT_STACK. The smaller 32-bit thread SHSTK allows more threads to
> +share a 32-bit address space.
I thought the size was passed in from userspace? Where does this sizing
take place? Is this a convention or is it being enforced?
> +Signal
> +------
> +
> +The main program and its signal handlers use the same SHSTK. Because
> +the SHSTK stores only return addresses, a large SHSTK will cover the
> +condition that both the program stack and the sigaltstack run out.
^ typo?
I'm not sure what this is trying to say.
> +The kernel creates a restore token at the SHSTK restoring address and
> +verifies that token when restoring from the signal handler.
I think there's a sentence or two of background missing here. I'm
really lost as to what this is trying to tell me.
> +IBT for signal delivering and sigreturn is the same as the main
> +program's setup; except for WAIT_ENDBR status, which can be read from
> +MSR_IA32_U_CET. In general, a task is in WAIT_ENDBR after an
> +indirect CALL/JMP and before the next instruction starts.
I'm 100% lost. I have no idea what this is trying to tell me or why it
is relevant to the kernel.
> +Fork
> +----
> +
> +The SHSTK's vma has VM_SHSTK flag set; its PTEs are required to be
> +read-only and dirty. When a SHSTK PTE is not present, RO, and dirty,
> +a SHSTK access triggers a page fault with an additional SHSTK bit set
> +in the page fault error code.
> +
> +When a task forks a child, its SHSTK PTEs are copied and both the
> +parent's and the child's SHSTK PTEs are cleared of the dirty bit.
> +Upon the next SHSTK access, the resulting SHSTK page fault is handled
> +by page copy/re-use.
What's the most important thing about shadow stacks and fork()? Does
this documentation tell that to the reader?
> +When a pthread child is created, the kernel allocates a new SHSTK for
> +the new thread.
Why is this here? Are pthread children created work fork()?
> +Setjmp/Longjmp
> +--------------
> +
> +Longjmp unwinds SHSTK until it matches the program stack.
I'm missing what this has to do with the kernel.
> +Ucontext
> +--------
> +
> +In GLIBC, getcontext/setcontext is implemented in similar way as
> +setjmp/longjmp.
> +
> +When makecontext creates a new ucontext, a new SHSTK is allocated for
> +that context with ARCH_X86_CET_ALLOC_SHSTK syscall. The kernel
Nit: ARCH_X86_CET_ALLOC_SHSTK is not a syscall.
> +creates a restore token at the top of the new SHSTK and the user-mode
> +code switches to the new SHSTK with the RSTORSSP instruction.
This seems like a howto for doing user-level threading. It seems like
it could be replaced by a single sentence in the
ARCH_X86_CET_ALLOC_SHSTK documentation explaining that new shadow stacks
are generally (always??) allocated along with new stacks. Since new
clone() threads need a new stack, they also need a new shadow stack.
User-level threads that need a new stack are also expected to allocate a
new shadow stack.
Right?
> +[7] The management of read-only & dirty PTEs for SHSTK
> +======================================================
> +
> +A RO and dirty PTE exists in the following cases:
> +
> +(a) A page is modified and then shared with a fork()'ed child;
> +(b) A R/O page that has been COW'ed;
> +(c) A SHSTK page.
> +
> +The processor only checks the dirty bit for (c). To prevent the use
> +of non-SHSTK memory as SHSTK, we use a spare bit of the 64-bit PTE as
> +DIRTY_SW for (a) and (b) above. This results to the following PTE
> +settings::
> +
> + Modified PTE: (R/W + DIRTY_HW)
> + Modified and shared PTE: (R/O + DIRTY_SW)
> + R/O PTE, COW'ed: (R/O + DIRTY_SW)
> + SHSTK PTE: (R/O + DIRTY_HW)
> + SHSTK PTE, COW'ed: (R/O + DIRTY_HW)
> + SHSTK PTE, shared: (R/O + DIRTY_SW)
> +
> +Note that DIRTY_SW is only used in R/O PTEs but not R/W PTEs.
I really don't think this belongs in the documentation, especially since
it's duplicated almost verbatim in code comments.
> +[8] The implementation of IBT legacy bitmap
> +===========================================
> +
> +When IBT is active, a non-IBT-capable legacy library can be executed
> +if its address ranges are specified in the legacy code bitmap. The
> +bitmap covers the whole user-space address, which is TASK_SIZE_MAX
> +for 64-bit and TASK_SIZE for IA32, and its each bit indicates a 4-KB
> +legacy code page. It is read-only from an application, and setup by
^ set up
> +the kernel as a special mapping when the first time the application
> +calls arch_prctl(ARCH_X86_CET_MARK_LEGACY_CODE). The application
> +manages the bitmap through the arch_prctl.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-26 17:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 107+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-05 18:19 [RFC PATCH v9 00/27] Control-flow Enforcement: Shadow Stack Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 01/27] Documentation/x86: Add CET description Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-06 0:16 ` Randy Dunlap
2020-02-06 20:17 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:02 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-28 15:55 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-26 17:57 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2020-03-09 17:00 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-03-09 17:21 ` Dave Hansen
2020-03-09 19:27 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-03-09 19:35 ` Dave Hansen
2020-03-09 19:50 ` H.J. Lu
2020-03-09 20:16 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-03-09 20:54 ` H.J. Lu
2020-03-09 20:59 ` Dave Hansen
2020-03-09 21:12 ` H.J. Lu
2020-03-09 22:02 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-03-09 22:19 ` Dave Hansen
2020-03-09 23:11 ` H.J. Lu
2020-03-09 23:20 ` Dave Hansen
2020-03-09 23:51 ` H.J. Lu
2020-03-09 23:59 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-03-10 0:08 ` H.J. Lu
2020-03-10 1:21 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-03-10 2:13 ` H.J. Lu
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 02/27] x86/cpufeatures: Add CET CPU feature flags for Control-flow Enforcement Technology (CET) Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:02 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 03/27] x86/fpu/xstate: Introduce CET MSR XSAVES supervisor states Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:04 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 04/27] x86/cet: Add control-protection fault handler Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:06 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-26 17:10 ` Dave Hansen
2020-03-05 20:44 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 05/27] x86/cet/shstk: Add Kconfig option for user-mode Shadow Stack protection Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:07 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-26 17:03 ` Dave Hansen
2020-02-26 19:57 ` Pavel Machek
2020-03-05 20:38 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-26 18:05 ` Dave Hansen
2020-02-27 1:02 ` H.J. Lu
2020-02-27 1:16 ` Dave Hansen
2020-02-27 2:11 ` H.J. Lu
2020-02-27 3:57 ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-02-27 18:03 ` Dave Hansen
2020-03-06 18:37 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-03-06 19:02 ` Dave Hansen
2020-03-06 21:16 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 06/27] mm: Introduce VM_SHSTK for Shadow Stack memory Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:07 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-26 18:07 ` Dave Hansen
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 07/27] Add guard pages around a Shadow Stack Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:11 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-26 18:17 ` Dave Hansen
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 08/27] x86/mm: Change _PAGE_DIRTY to _PAGE_DIRTY_HW Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:12 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-26 18:20 ` Dave Hansen
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 09/27] x86/mm: Introduce _PAGE_DIRTY_SW Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:12 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-26 21:35 ` Dave Hansen
2020-04-01 19:08 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-04-01 19:22 ` Dave Hansen
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 10/27] x86/mm: Update pte_modify, pmd_modify, and _PAGE_CHG_MASK for _PAGE_DIRTY_SW Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-26 22:02 ` Dave Hansen
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 11/27] drm/i915/gvt: Change _PAGE_DIRTY to _PAGE_DIRTY_BITS Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:13 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-26 22:04 ` Dave Hansen
2020-04-03 15:42 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 12/27] x86/mm: Modify ptep_set_wrprotect and pmdp_set_wrprotect for _PAGE_DIRTY_SW Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:14 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-26 22:20 ` Dave Hansen
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 13/27] x86/mm: Shadow Stack page fault error checking Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:16 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-26 22:47 ` Dave Hansen
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 14/27] mm: Handle Shadow Stack page fault Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:20 ` Kees Cook
2020-03-05 18:30 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-27 0:08 ` Dave Hansen
2020-04-07 18:14 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-04-07 22:21 ` Dave Hansen
2020-04-08 18:18 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 15/27] mm: Handle THP/HugeTLB " Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 20:59 ` Kees Cook
2020-03-13 22:00 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 16/27] mm: Update can_follow_write_pte() for Shadow Stack Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-27 0:34 ` Dave Hansen
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 17/27] x86/cet/shstk: User-mode Shadow Stack support Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 21:07 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-27 0:55 ` Dave Hansen
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 18/27] x86/cet/shstk: Introduce WRUSS instruction Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 21:10 ` Kees Cook
2020-03-05 18:39 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 19/27] x86/cet/shstk: Handle signals for Shadow Stack Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 21:17 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 20/27] ELF: UAPI and Kconfig additions for ELF program properties Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 21/27] binfmt_elf: Define GNU_PROPERTY_X86_FEATURE_1_AND Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 21:18 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 22/27] ELF: Add ELF program property parsing support Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 21:20 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 23/27] ELF: Introduce arch_setup_elf_property() Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 24/27] x86/cet/shstk: ELF header parsing for Shadow Stack Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 21:22 ` Kees Cook
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 25/27] x86/cet/shstk: Handle thread " Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 21:29 ` Kees Cook
2020-03-25 21:51 ` Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 26/27] mm/mmap: Add Shadow Stack pages to memory accounting Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-05 18:19 ` [RFC PATCH v9 27/27] x86/cet/shstk: Add arch_prctl functions for Shadow Stack Yu-cheng Yu
2020-02-25 21:31 ` [RFC PATCH v9 00/27] Control-flow Enforcement: " Kees Cook
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=9ae1cf84-1d84-1d34-c0ce-48b0d70b8f3f@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=esyr@redhat.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vedvyas.shanbhogue@intel.com \
--cc=x86-patch-review@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yu-cheng.yu@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).