All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
	kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	llvm@lists.linux.dev, kbuild-all@lists.01.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] powerpc/inst: Optimise copy_inst_from_kernel_nofault()
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 11:17:23 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YaZqs2tPxMzhgkAW@archlinux-ax161> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87a6hlq408.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>

On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 10:25:43PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> writes:
> > Le 29/11/2021 à 23:55, kernel test robot a écrit :
> >> Hi Christophe,
> >> 
> >> I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve:
> >> 
> >> [auto build test WARNING on powerpc/next]
> >> [also build test WARNING on v5.16-rc3 next-20211129]
> >> [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
> >> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
> >> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch]
> >> 
> >> url:    https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Christophe-Leroy/powerpc-inst-Refactor-___get_user_instr/20211130-015346
> >> base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/powerpc/linux.git next
> >> config: powerpc-randconfig-r023-20211129 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20211130/202111300652.0yDBNvyJ-lkp@intel.com/config)
> >> compiler: clang version 14.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project df08b2fe8b35cb63dfb3b49738a3494b9b4e6f8e)
> >> reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
> >>          wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
> >>          chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
> >>          # install powerpc cross compiling tool for clang build
> >>          # apt-get install binutils-powerpc-linux-gnu
> >>          # https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/fb7bff30cc0efc7e4df1b48bb69de1f325eee826
> >>          git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
> >>          git fetch --no-tags linux-review Christophe-Leroy/powerpc-inst-Refactor-___get_user_instr/20211130-015346
> >>          git checkout fb7bff30cc0efc7e4df1b48bb69de1f325eee826
> >>          # save the config file to linux build tree
> >>          mkdir build_dir
> >>          COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=clang make.cross W=1 O=build_dir ARCH=powerpc prepare
> >> 
> >> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
> >> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> >> 
> >> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
> >> 
> >>     In file included from arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.c:71:
> >>     In file included from arch/powerpc/kernel/../xmon/xmon_bpts.h:7:
> >>>> arch/powerpc/include/asm/inst.h:165:20: warning: variable 'val' is uninitialized when used here [-Wuninitialized]
> >>                     *inst = ppc_inst(val);
> >>                                      ^~~
> >>     arch/powerpc/include/asm/inst.h:53:22: note: expanded from macro 'ppc_inst'
> >>     #define ppc_inst(x) (x)
> >>                          ^
> >>     arch/powerpc/include/asm/inst.h:155:18: note: initialize the variable 'val' to silence this warning
> >>             unsigned int val, suffix;
> >>                             ^
> >>                              = 0
> >
> > I can't understand what's wrong here.
> >
> > We have
> >
> > 	__get_kernel_nofault(&val, src, u32, Efault);
> > 	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC64) && get_op(val) == OP_PREFIX) {
> > 		__get_kernel_nofault(&suffix, src + 1, u32, Efault);
> > 		*inst = ppc_inst_prefix(val, suffix);
> > 	} else {
> > 		*inst = ppc_inst(val);
> > 	}
> >
> > With
> >
> > #define __get_kernel_nofault(dst, src, type, err_label)			\
> > 	__get_user_size_goto(*((type *)(dst)),				\
> > 		(__force type __user *)(src), sizeof(type), err_label)
> >
> >
> > And
> >
> > #define __get_user_size_goto(x, ptr, size, label)				\
> > do {										\
> > 	BUILD_BUG_ON(size > sizeof(x));						\
> > 	switch (size) {								\
> > 	case 1: __get_user_asm_goto(x, (u8 __user *)ptr, label, "lbz"); break;	\
> > 	case 2: __get_user_asm_goto(x, (u16 __user *)ptr, label, "lhz"); break;	\
> > 	case 4: __get_user_asm_goto(x, (u32 __user *)ptr, label, "lwz"); break;	\
> > 	case 8: __get_user_asm2_goto(x, (u64 __user *)ptr, label);  break;	\
> > 	default: x = 0; BUILD_BUG();						\
> > 	}									\
> > } while (0)
> >
> > And
> >
> > #define __get_user_asm_goto(x, addr, label, op)			\
> > 	asm_volatile_goto(					\
> > 		"1:	"op"%U1%X1 %0, %1	# get_user\n"	\
> > 		EX_TABLE(1b, %l2)				\
> > 		: "=r" (x)					\
> > 		: "m<>" (*addr)				\
> > 		:						\
> > 		: label)
> >
> >
> > I see no possibility, no alternative path where val wouldn't be set. The 
> > asm clearly has *addr as an output param so it is always set.
> 
> I guess clang can't convince itself of that?

A simplified reproducer:

$ cat test.c
static inline int copy_inst_from_kernel_nofault(unsigned int *inst,
                                                unsigned int *src)
{
        unsigned int val;

        asm goto("1: lwz %U1%X1 %0, %1   # get_user\n"
                 ".section __ex_table,\"a\";"
                 ".balign 4;"
                 ".long (1b) - . ;"
                 ".long (%l2) - . ;"
                 ".previous"
                 : "=r" (*(unsigned int *)(&val))
                 : "m<>" (*(unsigned int *)(src))
                 :
                 : Efault);

        *inst = val;
        return 0;

Efault:
        return -14; /* -EFAULT */
}

$ clang --target=powerpc-linux-gnu -Wuninitialized -fsyntax-only test.c
test.c:17:10: warning: variable 'val' is uninitialized when used here [-Wuninitialized]
        *inst = val;
                ^~~
test.c:4:18: note: initialize the variable 'val' to silence this warning
        unsigned int val;
                        ^
                         = 0
1 warning generated.

It certainly looks like there is something wrong with how clang is
tracking the initialization of the variable because it looks to me like
val is only used in the fallthrough path, which happens after it is
initialized via lwz.  Perhaps something is wrong with the logic of
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71314?  I've added Bill to CC (LLVM issues are
being migrated from Bugzilla to GitHub Issues right now so I cannot file
this upstream at the moment).

Cheers,
Nathan

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: kbuild-all@lists.01.org, kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
	llvm@lists.linux.dev, Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] powerpc/inst: Optimise copy_inst_from_kernel_nofault()
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 11:17:23 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YaZqs2tPxMzhgkAW@archlinux-ax161> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87a6hlq408.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>

On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 10:25:43PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> writes:
> > Le 29/11/2021 à 23:55, kernel test robot a écrit :
> >> Hi Christophe,
> >> 
> >> I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve:
> >> 
> >> [auto build test WARNING on powerpc/next]
> >> [also build test WARNING on v5.16-rc3 next-20211129]
> >> [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
> >> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
> >> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch]
> >> 
> >> url:    https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Christophe-Leroy/powerpc-inst-Refactor-___get_user_instr/20211130-015346
> >> base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/powerpc/linux.git next
> >> config: powerpc-randconfig-r023-20211129 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20211130/202111300652.0yDBNvyJ-lkp@intel.com/config)
> >> compiler: clang version 14.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project df08b2fe8b35cb63dfb3b49738a3494b9b4e6f8e)
> >> reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
> >>          wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
> >>          chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
> >>          # install powerpc cross compiling tool for clang build
> >>          # apt-get install binutils-powerpc-linux-gnu
> >>          # https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/fb7bff30cc0efc7e4df1b48bb69de1f325eee826
> >>          git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
> >>          git fetch --no-tags linux-review Christophe-Leroy/powerpc-inst-Refactor-___get_user_instr/20211130-015346
> >>          git checkout fb7bff30cc0efc7e4df1b48bb69de1f325eee826
> >>          # save the config file to linux build tree
> >>          mkdir build_dir
> >>          COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=clang make.cross W=1 O=build_dir ARCH=powerpc prepare
> >> 
> >> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
> >> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> >> 
> >> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
> >> 
> >>     In file included from arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.c:71:
> >>     In file included from arch/powerpc/kernel/../xmon/xmon_bpts.h:7:
> >>>> arch/powerpc/include/asm/inst.h:165:20: warning: variable 'val' is uninitialized when used here [-Wuninitialized]
> >>                     *inst = ppc_inst(val);
> >>                                      ^~~
> >>     arch/powerpc/include/asm/inst.h:53:22: note: expanded from macro 'ppc_inst'
> >>     #define ppc_inst(x) (x)
> >>                          ^
> >>     arch/powerpc/include/asm/inst.h:155:18: note: initialize the variable 'val' to silence this warning
> >>             unsigned int val, suffix;
> >>                             ^
> >>                              = 0
> >
> > I can't understand what's wrong here.
> >
> > We have
> >
> > 	__get_kernel_nofault(&val, src, u32, Efault);
> > 	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC64) && get_op(val) == OP_PREFIX) {
> > 		__get_kernel_nofault(&suffix, src + 1, u32, Efault);
> > 		*inst = ppc_inst_prefix(val, suffix);
> > 	} else {
> > 		*inst = ppc_inst(val);
> > 	}
> >
> > With
> >
> > #define __get_kernel_nofault(dst, src, type, err_label)			\
> > 	__get_user_size_goto(*((type *)(dst)),				\
> > 		(__force type __user *)(src), sizeof(type), err_label)
> >
> >
> > And
> >
> > #define __get_user_size_goto(x, ptr, size, label)				\
> > do {										\
> > 	BUILD_BUG_ON(size > sizeof(x));						\
> > 	switch (size) {								\
> > 	case 1: __get_user_asm_goto(x, (u8 __user *)ptr, label, "lbz"); break;	\
> > 	case 2: __get_user_asm_goto(x, (u16 __user *)ptr, label, "lhz"); break;	\
> > 	case 4: __get_user_asm_goto(x, (u32 __user *)ptr, label, "lwz"); break;	\
> > 	case 8: __get_user_asm2_goto(x, (u64 __user *)ptr, label);  break;	\
> > 	default: x = 0; BUILD_BUG();						\
> > 	}									\
> > } while (0)
> >
> > And
> >
> > #define __get_user_asm_goto(x, addr, label, op)			\
> > 	asm_volatile_goto(					\
> > 		"1:	"op"%U1%X1 %0, %1	# get_user\n"	\
> > 		EX_TABLE(1b, %l2)				\
> > 		: "=r" (x)					\
> > 		: "m<>" (*addr)				\
> > 		:						\
> > 		: label)
> >
> >
> > I see no possibility, no alternative path where val wouldn't be set. The 
> > asm clearly has *addr as an output param so it is always set.
> 
> I guess clang can't convince itself of that?

A simplified reproducer:

$ cat test.c
static inline int copy_inst_from_kernel_nofault(unsigned int *inst,
                                                unsigned int *src)
{
        unsigned int val;

        asm goto("1: lwz %U1%X1 %0, %1   # get_user\n"
                 ".section __ex_table,\"a\";"
                 ".balign 4;"
                 ".long (1b) - . ;"
                 ".long (%l2) - . ;"
                 ".previous"
                 : "=r" (*(unsigned int *)(&val))
                 : "m<>" (*(unsigned int *)(src))
                 :
                 : Efault);

        *inst = val;
        return 0;

Efault:
        return -14; /* -EFAULT */
}

$ clang --target=powerpc-linux-gnu -Wuninitialized -fsyntax-only test.c
test.c:17:10: warning: variable 'val' is uninitialized when used here [-Wuninitialized]
        *inst = val;
                ^~~
test.c:4:18: note: initialize the variable 'val' to silence this warning
        unsigned int val;
                        ^
                         = 0
1 warning generated.

It certainly looks like there is something wrong with how clang is
tracking the initialization of the variable because it looks to me like
val is only used in the fallthrough path, which happens after it is
initialized via lwz.  Perhaps something is wrong with the logic of
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71314?  I've added Bill to CC (LLVM issues are
being migrated from Bugzilla to GitHub Issues right now so I cannot file
this upstream at the moment).

Cheers,
Nathan

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
To: kbuild-all@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] powerpc/inst: Optimise copy_inst_from_kernel_nofault()
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 11:17:23 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YaZqs2tPxMzhgkAW@archlinux-ax161> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87a6hlq408.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6033 bytes --]

On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 10:25:43PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> writes:
> > Le 29/11/2021 à 23:55, kernel test robot a écrit :
> >> Hi Christophe,
> >> 
> >> I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve:
> >> 
> >> [auto build test WARNING on powerpc/next]
> >> [also build test WARNING on v5.16-rc3 next-20211129]
> >> [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
> >> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
> >> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch]
> >> 
> >> url:    https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Christophe-Leroy/powerpc-inst-Refactor-___get_user_instr/20211130-015346
> >> base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/powerpc/linux.git next
> >> config: powerpc-randconfig-r023-20211129 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20211130/202111300652.0yDBNvyJ-lkp(a)intel.com/config)
> >> compiler: clang version 14.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project df08b2fe8b35cb63dfb3b49738a3494b9b4e6f8e)
> >> reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
> >>          wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
> >>          chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
> >>          # install powerpc cross compiling tool for clang build
> >>          # apt-get install binutils-powerpc-linux-gnu
> >>          # https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/fb7bff30cc0efc7e4df1b48bb69de1f325eee826
> >>          git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
> >>          git fetch --no-tags linux-review Christophe-Leroy/powerpc-inst-Refactor-___get_user_instr/20211130-015346
> >>          git checkout fb7bff30cc0efc7e4df1b48bb69de1f325eee826
> >>          # save the config file to linux build tree
> >>          mkdir build_dir
> >>          COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=clang make.cross W=1 O=build_dir ARCH=powerpc prepare
> >> 
> >> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
> >> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> >> 
> >> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
> >> 
> >>     In file included from arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.c:71:
> >>     In file included from arch/powerpc/kernel/../xmon/xmon_bpts.h:7:
> >>>> arch/powerpc/include/asm/inst.h:165:20: warning: variable 'val' is uninitialized when used here [-Wuninitialized]
> >>                     *inst = ppc_inst(val);
> >>                                      ^~~
> >>     arch/powerpc/include/asm/inst.h:53:22: note: expanded from macro 'ppc_inst'
> >>     #define ppc_inst(x) (x)
> >>                          ^
> >>     arch/powerpc/include/asm/inst.h:155:18: note: initialize the variable 'val' to silence this warning
> >>             unsigned int val, suffix;
> >>                             ^
> >>                              = 0
> >
> > I can't understand what's wrong here.
> >
> > We have
> >
> > 	__get_kernel_nofault(&val, src, u32, Efault);
> > 	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC64) && get_op(val) == OP_PREFIX) {
> > 		__get_kernel_nofault(&suffix, src + 1, u32, Efault);
> > 		*inst = ppc_inst_prefix(val, suffix);
> > 	} else {
> > 		*inst = ppc_inst(val);
> > 	}
> >
> > With
> >
> > #define __get_kernel_nofault(dst, src, type, err_label)			\
> > 	__get_user_size_goto(*((type *)(dst)),				\
> > 		(__force type __user *)(src), sizeof(type), err_label)
> >
> >
> > And
> >
> > #define __get_user_size_goto(x, ptr, size, label)				\
> > do {										\
> > 	BUILD_BUG_ON(size > sizeof(x));						\
> > 	switch (size) {								\
> > 	case 1: __get_user_asm_goto(x, (u8 __user *)ptr, label, "lbz"); break;	\
> > 	case 2: __get_user_asm_goto(x, (u16 __user *)ptr, label, "lhz"); break;	\
> > 	case 4: __get_user_asm_goto(x, (u32 __user *)ptr, label, "lwz"); break;	\
> > 	case 8: __get_user_asm2_goto(x, (u64 __user *)ptr, label);  break;	\
> > 	default: x = 0; BUILD_BUG();						\
> > 	}									\
> > } while (0)
> >
> > And
> >
> > #define __get_user_asm_goto(x, addr, label, op)			\
> > 	asm_volatile_goto(					\
> > 		"1:	"op"%U1%X1 %0, %1	# get_user\n"	\
> > 		EX_TABLE(1b, %l2)				\
> > 		: "=r" (x)					\
> > 		: "m<>" (*addr)				\
> > 		:						\
> > 		: label)
> >
> >
> > I see no possibility, no alternative path where val wouldn't be set. The 
> > asm clearly has *addr as an output param so it is always set.
> 
> I guess clang can't convince itself of that?

A simplified reproducer:

$ cat test.c
static inline int copy_inst_from_kernel_nofault(unsigned int *inst,
                                                unsigned int *src)
{
        unsigned int val;

        asm goto("1: lwz %U1%X1 %0, %1   # get_user\n"
                 ".section __ex_table,\"a\";"
                 ".balign 4;"
                 ".long (1b) - . ;"
                 ".long (%l2) - . ;"
                 ".previous"
                 : "=r" (*(unsigned int *)(&val))
                 : "m<>" (*(unsigned int *)(src))
                 :
                 : Efault);

        *inst = val;
        return 0;

Efault:
        return -14; /* -EFAULT */
}

$ clang --target=powerpc-linux-gnu -Wuninitialized -fsyntax-only test.c
test.c:17:10: warning: variable 'val' is uninitialized when used here [-Wuninitialized]
        *inst = val;
                ^~~
test.c:4:18: note: initialize the variable 'val' to silence this warning
        unsigned int val;
                        ^
                         = 0
1 warning generated.

It certainly looks like there is something wrong with how clang is
tracking the initialization of the variable because it looks to me like
val is only used in the fallthrough path, which happens after it is
initialized via lwz.  Perhaps something is wrong with the logic of
https://reviews.llvm.org/D71314?  I've added Bill to CC (LLVM issues are
being migrated from Bugzilla to GitHub Issues right now so I cannot file
this upstream at the moment).

Cheers,
Nathan

  reply	other threads:[~2021-11-30 18:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-11-29 17:49 [PATCH v5 1/5] powerpc/inst: Refactor ___get_user_instr() Christophe Leroy
2021-11-29 17:49 ` Christophe Leroy
2021-11-29 17:49 ` [PATCH v5 2/5] powerpc/inst: Define ppc_inst_t Christophe Leroy
2021-11-29 17:49   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-11-29 17:49 ` [PATCH v5 3/5] powerpc/inst: Define ppc_inst_t as u32 on PPC32 Christophe Leroy
2021-11-29 17:49   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-11-29 17:49 ` [PATCH v5 4/5] powerpc/inst: Move ppc_inst_t definition in asm/reg.h Christophe Leroy
2021-11-29 17:49   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-11-29 17:49 ` [PATCH v5 5/5] powerpc/inst: Optimise copy_inst_from_kernel_nofault() Christophe Leroy
2021-11-29 17:49   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-11-29 22:55   ` kernel test robot
2021-11-29 22:55     ` kernel test robot
2021-11-29 22:55     ` kernel test robot
2021-11-30  5:58     ` Christophe Leroy
2021-11-30  5:58       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-11-30  5:58       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-11-30 11:25       ` Michael Ellerman
2021-11-30 11:25         ` Michael Ellerman
2021-11-30 11:25         ` Michael Ellerman
2021-11-30 18:17         ` Nathan Chancellor [this message]
2021-11-30 18:17           ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-11-30 18:17           ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-11-30 18:38           ` Bill Wendling
2021-11-30 18:38             ` Bill Wendling
2021-11-30 18:38             ` Bill Wendling
2021-11-30 18:44             ` Bill Wendling
2021-11-30 18:44               ` Bill Wendling
2021-11-30 18:44               ` Bill Wendling
2021-12-07  3:37               ` Michael Ellerman
2021-12-07  3:37                 ` Michael Ellerman
2021-12-07  3:37                 ` Michael Ellerman
2021-12-07  4:48                 ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-12-07  4:48                   ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-12-07  4:48                   ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-12-07  5:45                   ` Christophe Leroy
2021-12-07  5:45                     ` Christophe Leroy
2021-12-07  5:45                     ` Christophe Leroy
2021-12-07  6:41                     ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-12-07  6:41                       ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-12-07  6:41                       ` Nathan Chancellor
2021-12-07  7:55                       ` Christophe Leroy
2021-12-07  7:55                         ` Christophe Leroy
2021-12-07  7:55                         ` Christophe Leroy
2021-12-07 11:19                   ` Michael Ellerman
2021-12-07 11:19                     ` Michael Ellerman
2021-12-07 11:19                     ` Michael Ellerman
2021-12-01  6:45   ` kernel test robot
2021-12-01  6:45     ` kernel test robot
2021-12-01  6:45     ` kernel test robot
2021-12-15  0:24 ` [PATCH v5 1/5] powerpc/inst: Refactor ___get_user_instr() Michael Ellerman

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=YaZqs2tPxMzhgkAW@archlinux-ax161 \
    --to=nathan@kernel.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
    --cc=kbuild-all@lists.01.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=morbo@google.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.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.