Linux-rt-users Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
* [RT] 5.9-rt14  softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock  lockdep splat
@ 2020-10-10  4:31 Mike Galbraith
  2020-10-12 16:45 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Mike Galbraith @ 2020-10-10  4:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior; +Cc: tglx, linux-rt-users, lkml


[   47.844511] ======================================================
[   47.844511] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[   47.844512] 5.9.0.gc85fb28-rt14-rt #1 Tainted: G            E
[   47.844513] ------------------------------------------------------
[   47.844514] perl/2751 is trying to acquire lock:
[   47.844515] ffff92cadec5a410 ((softirq_ctrl.lock).lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: __local_bh_disable_ip+0x127/0x2c0
[   47.844521]
               but task is already holding lock:
[   47.844522] ffffffffa8871468 (&h->listening_hash[i].lock){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: listening_get_next.isra.41+0xd7/0x130
[   47.844528]
               which lock already depends on the new lock.

[   47.844528]
               the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[   47.844529]
               -> #1 (&h->listening_hash[i].lock){+.+.}-{0:0}:
[   47.844532]        rt_spin_lock+0x2b/0xc0
[   47.844536]        __inet_hash+0x68/0x320
[   47.844539]        inet_hash+0x31/0x60
[   47.844541]        inet_csk_listen_start+0xaf/0xe0
[   47.844543]        inet_listen+0x86/0x150
[   47.844546]        __sys_listen+0x58/0x80
[   47.844548]        __x64_sys_listen+0x12/0x20
[   47.844549]        do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
[   47.844552]        entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
[   47.844555]
               -> #0 ((softirq_ctrl.lock).lock){+.+.}-{2:2}:
[   47.844557]        __lock_acquire+0x1343/0x1890
[   47.844560]        lock_acquire+0x92/0x410
[   47.844562]        rt_spin_lock+0x2b/0xc0
[   47.844564]        __local_bh_disable_ip+0x127/0x2c0
[   47.844566]        sock_i_ino+0x22/0x60
[   47.844569]        tcp4_seq_show+0x14f/0x420
[   47.844571]        seq_read+0x27c/0x420
[   47.844574]        proc_reg_read+0x5c/0x80
[   47.844576]        vfs_read+0xd1/0x1d0
[   47.844580]        ksys_read+0x87/0xc0
[   47.844581]        do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
[   47.844583]        entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
[   47.844585]
               other info that might help us debug this:

[   47.844585]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:

[   47.844586]        CPU0                    CPU1
[   47.844586]        ----                    ----
[   47.844587]   lock(&h->listening_hash[i].lock);
[   47.844588]                                lock((softirq_ctrl.lock).lock);
[   47.844588]                                lock(&h->listening_hash[i].lock);
[   47.844589]   lock((softirq_ctrl.lock).lock);
[   47.844590]
                *** DEADLOCK ***

[   47.844590] 3 locks held by perl/2751:
[   47.844591]  #0: ffff92ca6525a4e0 (&p->lock){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: seq_read+0x37/0x420
[   47.844594]  #1: ffffffffa8871468 (&h->listening_hash[i].lock){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: listening_get_next.isra.41+0xd7/0x130
[   47.844597]  #2: ffffffffa74b90e0 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: rt_spin_lock+0x5/0xc0
[   47.844600]
               stack backtrace:
[   47.844601] CPU: 1 PID: 2751 Comm: perl Kdump: loaded Tainted: G            E     5.9.0.gc85fb28-rt14-rt #1
[   47.844603] Hardware name: MEDION MS-7848/MS-7848, BIOS M7848W08.20C 09/23/2013
[   47.844604] Call Trace:
[   47.844606]  dump_stack+0x77/0x9b
[   47.844611]  check_noncircular+0x148/0x160
[   47.844616]  ? __lock_acquire+0x1343/0x1890
[   47.844617]  __lock_acquire+0x1343/0x1890
[   47.844621]  lock_acquire+0x92/0x410
[   47.844623]  ? __local_bh_disable_ip+0x127/0x2c0
[   47.844626]  ? sock_i_ino+0x5/0x60
[   47.844628]  rt_spin_lock+0x2b/0xc0
[   47.844630]  ? __local_bh_disable_ip+0x127/0x2c0
[   47.844631]  __local_bh_disable_ip+0x127/0x2c0
[   47.844634]  sock_i_ino+0x22/0x60
[   47.844635]  tcp4_seq_show+0x14f/0x420
[   47.844640]  seq_read+0x27c/0x420
[   47.844643]  proc_reg_read+0x5c/0x80
[   47.844645]  vfs_read+0xd1/0x1d0
[   47.844648]  ksys_read+0x87/0xc0
[   47.844649]  ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0x78/0x100
[   47.844652]  do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40
[   47.844654]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
[   47.844656] RIP: 0033:0x7fb3f3c23e51
[   47.844658] Code: 7d 81 20 00 f7 d8 64 89 02 48 c7 c0 ff ff ff ff eb ba 0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00 8b 05 1a c3 20 00 48 63 ff 85 c0 75 13 31 c0 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 57 f3 c3 0f 1f 44 00 00 55 53 48 89 d5 48 89
[   47.844660] RSP: 002b:00007ffd7604f108 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000000
[   47.844661] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007fb3f3c23e51
[   47.844662] RDX: 0000000000002000 RSI: 000055dbff4da600 RDI: 0000000000000003
[   47.844662] RBP: 0000000000002000 R08: 000055dbff4d9290 R09: 000055dbff4da600
[   47.844663] R10: ffffffffffffffb0 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 000055dbff4da600
[   47.844664] R13: 000055dbff4ae260 R14: 000055dbff4d92c0 R15: 0000000000000003


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [RT] 5.9-rt14  softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat
  2020-10-10  4:31 [RT] 5.9-rt14 softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat Mike Galbraith
@ 2020-10-12 16:45 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
  2020-10-12 18:34   ` Mike Galbraith
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2020-10-12 16:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mike Galbraith; +Cc: tglx, linux-rt-users, lkml

On 2020-10-10 06:31:57 [+0200], Mike Galbraith wrote:

so this then. Do you have more of these?

----------->8--------------------
Subject: [PATCH] tcp: Remove superfluous BH-disable around listening_hash

Commit
   9652dc2eb9e40 ("tcp: relax listening_hash operations")

removed the need to disable bottom half while acquiring
listening_hash.lock. There are still two callers left which disable
bottom half before the lock is acquired.

Drop local_bh_disable() around __inet_hash() which acquires
listening_hash->lock, invoke inet_ehash_nolisten() with disabled BH.
inet_unhash() conditionally acquires listening_hash->lock.

Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
---
 net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c  | 19 ++++++++++++-------
 net/ipv6/inet6_hashtables.c |  5 +----
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
index 239e54474b653..fcb105cbb5465 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
@@ -585,7 +585,9 @@ int __inet_hash(struct sock *sk, struct sock *osk)
 	int err = 0;
 
 	if (sk->sk_state != TCP_LISTEN) {
+		local_bh_disable();
 		inet_ehash_nolisten(sk, osk);
+		local_bh_enable();
 		return 0;
 	}
 	WARN_ON(!sk_unhashed(sk));
@@ -617,11 +619,8 @@ int inet_hash(struct sock *sk)
 {
 	int err = 0;
 
-	if (sk->sk_state != TCP_CLOSE) {
-		local_bh_disable();
+	if (sk->sk_state != TCP_CLOSE)
 		err = __inet_hash(sk, NULL);
-		local_bh_enable();
-	}
 
 	return err;
 }
@@ -632,17 +631,20 @@ void inet_unhash(struct sock *sk)
 	struct inet_hashinfo *hashinfo = sk->sk_prot->h.hashinfo;
 	struct inet_listen_hashbucket *ilb = NULL;
 	spinlock_t *lock;
+	bool state_listen;
 
 	if (sk_unhashed(sk))
 		return;
 
 	if (sk->sk_state == TCP_LISTEN) {
+		state_listen = true;
 		ilb = &hashinfo->listening_hash[inet_sk_listen_hashfn(sk)];
-		lock = &ilb->lock;
+		spin_lock(&ilb->lock);
 	} else {
+		state_listen = false;
 		lock = inet_ehash_lockp(hashinfo, sk->sk_hash);
+		spin_lock_bh(lock);
 	}
-	spin_lock_bh(lock);
 	if (sk_unhashed(sk))
 		goto unlock;
 
@@ -655,7 +657,10 @@ void inet_unhash(struct sock *sk)
 	__sk_nulls_del_node_init_rcu(sk);
 	sock_prot_inuse_add(sock_net(sk), sk->sk_prot, -1);
 unlock:
-	spin_unlock_bh(lock);
+	if (state_listen)
+		spin_unlock(&ilb->lock);
+	else
+		spin_unlock_bh(lock);
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(inet_unhash);
 
diff --git a/net/ipv6/inet6_hashtables.c b/net/ipv6/inet6_hashtables.c
index 2d3add9e61162..50fd17cbf3ec7 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/inet6_hashtables.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/inet6_hashtables.c
@@ -335,11 +335,8 @@ int inet6_hash(struct sock *sk)
 {
 	int err = 0;
 
-	if (sk->sk_state != TCP_CLOSE) {
-		local_bh_disable();
+	if (sk->sk_state != TCP_CLOSE)
 		err = __inet_hash(sk, NULL);
-		local_bh_enable();
-	}
 
 	return err;
 }
-- 
2.28.0


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [RT] 5.9-rt14  softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat
  2020-10-12 16:45 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
@ 2020-10-12 18:34   ` Mike Galbraith
  2020-10-13  3:00     ` Mike Galbraith
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Mike Galbraith @ 2020-10-12 18:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior; +Cc: tglx, linux-rt-users, lkml

On Mon, 2020-10-12 at 18:45 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2020-10-10 06:31:57 [+0200], Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> so this then. Do you have more of these?

Nope, nothing was hiding behind it, all better now.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [RT] 5.9-rt14  softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat
  2020-10-12 18:34   ` Mike Galbraith
@ 2020-10-13  3:00     ` Mike Galbraith
  2020-10-14 10:22       ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Mike Galbraith @ 2020-10-13  3:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior; +Cc: tglx, linux-rt-users, lkml

On Mon, 2020-10-12 at 20:34 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-10-12 at 18:45 +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > On 2020-10-10 06:31:57 [+0200], Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> > so this then. Do you have more of these?
>
> Nope....

Well, I do have a gripe from 5.6-rt, which I just took a moment to
confirm in virgin source, but that kernel is probably EOL.

[   24.613988] ======================================================
[   24.613988] WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
[   24.613989] 5.6.19-rt12-rt #3 Tainted: G            E
[   24.613990] ------------------------------------------------------
[   24.613991] ksoftirqd/0/10 is trying to acquire lock:
[   24.613992] ffff94a639fd6a48 (&sch->q.lock){+...}, at: sch_direct_xmit+0x81/0x2f0
[   24.613998]
               but task is already holding lock:
[   24.613998] ffff94a639fd6a80 (&(&sch->running)->seqcount){+...}, at: br_dev_queue_push_xmit+0x79/0x160 [bridge]
[   24.614007]
               which lock already depends on the new lock.

[   24.614008]
               the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
[   24.614009]
               -> #1 (&(&sch->running)->seqcount){+...}:
[   24.614010]        __dev_queue_xmit+0xc86/0xda0
[   24.614012]        br_dev_queue_push_xmit+0x79/0x160 [bridge]
[   24.614017]        br_forward_finish+0x10a/0x1b0 [bridge]
[   24.614021]        __br_forward+0x17d/0x340 [bridge]
[   24.614024]        br_dev_xmit+0x432/0x560 [bridge]
[   24.614029]        dev_hard_start_xmit+0xc5/0x3f0
[   24.614030]        __dev_queue_xmit+0x973/0xda0
[   24.614031]        ip6_finish_output2+0x290/0x980
[   24.614033]        ip6_output+0x6d/0x260
[   24.614034]        mld_sendpack+0x1d9/0x360
[   24.614035]        mld_ifc_timer_expire+0x1f7/0x370
[   24.614036]        call_timer_fn+0x98/0x390
[   24.614038]        run_timer_softirq+0x591/0x720
[   24.614040]        __do_softirq+0xca/0x561
[   24.614042]        run_ksoftirqd+0x45/0x70
[   24.614043]        smpboot_thread_fn+0x266/0x320
[   24.614045]        kthread+0x11c/0x140
[   24.614047]        ret_from_fork+0x24/0x50
[   24.614049]
               -> #0 (&sch->q.lock){+...}:
[   24.614050]        __lock_acquire+0x115a/0x1440
[   24.614052]        lock_acquire+0x93/0x230
[   24.614053]        rt_spin_lock+0x78/0xd0
[   24.614055]        sch_direct_xmit+0x81/0x2f0
[   24.614056]        __dev_queue_xmit+0xcd7/0xda0
[   24.614057]        br_dev_queue_push_xmit+0x79/0x160 [bridge]
[   24.614062]        br_forward_finish+0x10a/0x1b0 [bridge]
[   24.614067]        __br_forward+0x17d/0x340 [bridge]
[   24.614072]        br_dev_xmit+0x432/0x560 [bridge]
[   24.614076]        dev_hard_start_xmit+0xc5/0x3f0
[   24.614077]        __dev_queue_xmit+0x973/0xda0
[   24.614078]        ip6_finish_output2+0x290/0x980
[   24.614079]        ip6_output+0x6d/0x260
[   24.614080]        mld_sendpack+0x1d9/0x360
[   24.614081]        mld_ifc_timer_expire+0x1f7/0x370
[   24.614082]        call_timer_fn+0x98/0x390
[   24.614084]        run_timer_softirq+0x591/0x720
[   24.614085]        __do_softirq+0xca/0x561
[   24.614086]        run_ksoftirqd+0x45/0x70
[   24.614087]        smpboot_thread_fn+0x266/0x320
[   24.614089]        kthread+0x11c/0x140
[   24.614090]        ret_from_fork+0x24/0x50
[   24.614091]
               other info that might help us debug this:

[   24.614092]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:

[   24.614092]        CPU0                    CPU1
[   24.614093]        ----                    ----
[   24.614093]   lock(&(&sch->running)->seqcount);
[   24.614094]                                lock(&sch->q.lock);
[   24.614095]                                lock(&(&sch->running)->seqcount);
[   24.614096]   lock(&sch->q.lock);
[   24.614097]
                *** DEADLOCK ***

[   24.614097] 20 locks held by ksoftirqd/0/10:
[   24.614098]  #0: ffffffffa2485fc0 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: rt_spin_lock+0x5/0xd0
[   24.614101]  #1: ffff94a65ec1b5a0 (per_cpu_ptr(&bh_lock.lock, cpu)){....}, at: __local_bh_disable_ip+0xda/0x1c0
[   24.614103]  #2: ffffffffa2485fc0 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: __local_bh_disable_ip+0x106/0x1c0
[   24.614105]  #3: ffffffffa2485fc0 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: rt_spin_lock+0x5/0xd0
[   24.614107]  #4: ffff94a65ec1c1e0 (&base->expiry_lock){+...}, at: run_timer_softirq+0x3e3/0x720
[   24.614110]  #5: ffffb3bd40077d70 ((&idev->mc_ifc_timer)){+...}, at: call_timer_fn+0x5/0x390
[   24.614113]  #6: ffffffffa2485fc0 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: mld_sendpack+0x5/0x360
[   24.614116]  #7: ffffffffa2485fc0 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: __local_bh_disable_ip+0x106/0x1c0
[   24.614118]  #8: ffffffffa2485fa0 (rcu_read_lock_bh){....}, at: ip6_finish_output2+0x7a/0x980
[   24.614121]  #9: ffffffffa2485fc0 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: __local_bh_disable_ip+0x106/0x1c0
[   24.614124]  #10: ffffffffa2485fa0 (rcu_read_lock_bh){....}, at: __dev_queue_xmit+0x63/0xda0
[   24.614126]  #11: ffffffffa2485fc0 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: br_dev_xmit+0x5/0x560 [bridge]
[   24.614133]  #12: ffffffffa2485fc0 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: __local_bh_disable_ip+0x106/0x1c0
[   24.614135]  #13: ffffffffa2485fa0 (rcu_read_lock_bh){....}, at: __dev_queue_xmit+0x63/0xda0
[   24.614138]  #14: ffffffffa2485fc0 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: rt_spin_lock+0x5/0xd0
[   24.614140]  #15: ffff94a639fd6d60 (&dev->qdisc_tx_busylock_key){+...}, at: __dev_queue_xmit+0x89e/0xda0
[   24.614143]  #16: ffffffffa2485fc0 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: rt_spin_lock+0x5/0xd0
[   24.614145]  #17: ffff94a639fd6b40 (&dev->qdisc_running_key){+...}, at: __dev_queue_xmit+0xc52/0xda0
[   24.614148]  #18: ffff94a639fd6a80 (&(&sch->running)->seqcount){+...}, at: br_dev_queue_push_xmit+0x79/0x160 [bridge]
[   24.614154]  #19: ffffffffa2485fc0 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: rt_spin_lock+0x5/0xd0
[   24.614155]
               stack backtrace:
[   24.614156] CPU: 0 PID: 10 Comm: ksoftirqd/0 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G            E     5.6.19-rt12-rt #3
[   24.614157] Hardware name: MEDION MS-7848/MS-7848, BIOS M7848W08.20C 09/23/2013
[   24.614158] Call Trace:
[   24.614160]  dump_stack+0x71/0x9b
[   24.614163]  check_noncircular+0x155/0x170
[   24.614166]  ? __lock_acquire+0x115a/0x1440
[   24.614168]  __lock_acquire+0x115a/0x1440
[   24.614172]  lock_acquire+0x93/0x230
[   24.614173]  ? sch_direct_xmit+0x81/0x2f0
[   24.614177]  rt_spin_lock+0x78/0xd0
[   24.614178]  ? sch_direct_xmit+0x81/0x2f0
[   24.614180]  sch_direct_xmit+0x81/0x2f0
[   24.614182]  __dev_queue_xmit+0xcd7/0xda0
[   24.614184]  ? find_held_lock+0x2d/0x90
[   24.614186]  ? br_forward_finish+0xde/0x1b0 [bridge]
[   24.614192]  ? br_dev_queue_push_xmit+0x79/0x160 [bridge]
[   24.614197]  br_dev_queue_push_xmit+0x79/0x160 [bridge]
[   24.614203]  br_forward_finish+0x10a/0x1b0 [bridge]
[   24.614210]  __br_forward+0x17d/0x340 [bridge]
[   24.614216]  ? br_flood+0x98/0x120 [bridge]
[   24.614222]  br_dev_xmit+0x432/0x560 [bridge]
[   24.614228]  dev_hard_start_xmit+0xc5/0x3f0
[   24.614232]  __dev_queue_xmit+0x973/0xda0
[   24.614233]  ? mark_held_locks+0x2d/0x80
[   24.614235]  ? eth_header+0x25/0xc0
[   24.614238]  ? ip6_finish_output2+0x290/0x980
[   24.614239]  ip6_finish_output2+0x290/0x980
[   24.614242]  ? ip6_mtu+0x135/0x1b0
[   24.614246]  ? ip6_output+0x6d/0x260
[   24.614247]  ip6_output+0x6d/0x260
[   24.614249]  ? __ip6_finish_output+0x210/0x210
[   24.614252]  mld_sendpack+0x1d9/0x360
[   24.614255]  ? mld_ifc_timer_expire+0x119/0x370
[   24.614256]  mld_ifc_timer_expire+0x1f7/0x370
[   24.614258]  ? mld_dad_timer_expire+0xb0/0xb0
[   24.614259]  ? mld_dad_timer_expire+0xb0/0xb0
[   24.614260]  call_timer_fn+0x98/0x390
[   24.614263]  ? mld_dad_timer_expire+0xb0/0xb0
[   24.614264]  run_timer_softirq+0x591/0x720
[   24.614267]  __do_softirq+0xca/0x561
[   24.614271]  ? smpboot_thread_fn+0x28/0x320
[   24.614273]  ? smpboot_thread_fn+0x70/0x320
[   24.614274]  run_ksoftirqd+0x45/0x70
[   24.614275]  smpboot_thread_fn+0x266/0x320
[   24.614277]  ? smpboot_register_percpu_thread+0xe0/0xe0
[   24.614278]  kthread+0x11c/0x140
[   24.614280]  ? kthread_park+0x90/0x90
[   24.614282]  ret_from_fork+0x24/0x50


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [RT] 5.9-rt14  softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat
  2020-10-13  3:00     ` Mike Galbraith
@ 2020-10-14 10:22       ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior @ 2020-10-14 10:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mike Galbraith; +Cc: tglx, linux-rt-users, lkml

On 2020-10-13 05:00:18 [+0200], Mike Galbraith wrote:
> Well, I do have a gripe from 5.6-rt, which I just took a moment to
> confirm in virgin source, but that kernel is probably EOL.

Yes. But I you patch for v5.9 so this should also work on v5.6.

Sebastian

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-10-10  4:31 [RT] 5.9-rt14 softirq_ctrl.lock vs listening_hash[i].lock lockdep splat Mike Galbraith
2020-10-12 16:45 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2020-10-12 18:34   ` Mike Galbraith
2020-10-13  3:00     ` Mike Galbraith
2020-10-14 10:22       ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior

Linux-rt-users Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rt-users/0 linux-rt-users/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-rt-users linux-rt-users/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rt-users \
		linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-rt-users

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-rt-users


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git