From: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-arch <linux-arch-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
Russell King <rmk-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5/8] kernel: move arches the use the generic byteshifting implemetation
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 12:44:08 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1207856648.22001.29.camel@brick> (raw)
arm chooses endianness based on compiler settings.
v850 is le, but does not use the generic c-struct implementation and
uses the byteshifting for both be and le.
Signed-off-by: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
---
include/asm-arm/unaligned.h | 166 +-----------------------------------------
include/asm-v850/unaligned.h | 111 +---------------------------
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 273 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/asm-arm/unaligned.h b/include/asm-arm/unaligned.h
index 5db03cf..d5cf478 100644
--- a/include/asm-arm/unaligned.h
+++ b/include/asm-arm/unaligned.h
@@ -1,171 +1,7 @@
#ifndef __ASM_ARM_UNALIGNED_H
#define __ASM_ARM_UNALIGNED_H
-#include <asm/types.h>
-
-extern int __bug_unaligned_x(const void *ptr);
-
-/*
- * What is the most efficient way of loading/storing an unaligned value?
- *
- * That is the subject of this file. Efficiency here is defined as
- * minimum code size with minimum register usage for the common cases.
- * It is currently not believed that long longs are common, so we
- * trade efficiency for the chars, shorts and longs against the long
- * longs.
- *
- * Current stats with gcc 2.7.2.2 for these functions:
- *
- * ptrsize get: code regs put: code regs
- * 1 1 1 1 2
- * 2 3 2 3 2
- * 4 7 3 7 3
- * 8 20 6 16 6
- *
- * gcc 2.95.1 seems to code differently:
- *
- * ptrsize get: code regs put: code regs
- * 1 1 1 1 2
- * 2 3 2 3 2
- * 4 7 4 7 4
- * 8 19 8 15 6
- *
- * which may or may not be more efficient (depending upon whether
- * you can afford the extra registers). Hopefully the gcc 2.95
- * is inteligent enough to decide if it is better to use the
- * extra register, but evidence so far seems to suggest otherwise.
- *
- * Unfortunately, gcc is not able to optimise the high word
- * out of long long >> 32, or the low word from long long << 32
- */
-
-#define __get_unaligned_2_le(__p) \
- (unsigned int)(__p[0] | __p[1] << 8)
-
-#define __get_unaligned_2_be(__p) \
- (unsigned int)(__p[0] << 8 | __p[1])
-
-#define __get_unaligned_4_le(__p) \
- (unsigned int)(__p[0] | __p[1] << 8 | __p[2] << 16 | __p[3] << 24)
-
-#define __get_unaligned_4_be(__p) \
- (unsigned int)(__p[0] << 24 | __p[1] << 16 | __p[2] << 8 | __p[3])
-
-#define __get_unaligned_8_le(__p) \
- ((unsigned long long)__get_unaligned_4_le((__p+4)) << 32 | \
- __get_unaligned_4_le(__p))
-
-#define __get_unaligned_8_be(__p) \
- ((unsigned long long)__get_unaligned_4_be(__p) << 32 | \
- __get_unaligned_4_be((__p+4)))
-
-#define __get_unaligned_le(ptr) \
- ((__force typeof(*(ptr)))({ \
- const __u8 *__p = (const __u8 *)(ptr); \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 1, *__p, \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 2, __get_unaligned_2_le(__p), \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 4, __get_unaligned_4_le(__p), \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 8, __get_unaligned_8_le(__p), \
- (void)__bug_unaligned_x(__p))))); \
- }))
-
-#define __get_unaligned_be(ptr) \
- ((__force typeof(*(ptr)))({ \
- const __u8 *__p = (const __u8 *)(ptr); \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 1, *__p, \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 2, __get_unaligned_2_be(__p), \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 4, __get_unaligned_4_be(__p), \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 8, __get_unaligned_8_be(__p), \
- (void)__bug_unaligned_x(__p))))); \
- }))
-
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_2_le(__u32 __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- *__p++ = __v;
- *__p++ = __v >> 8;
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_2_be(__u32 __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- *__p++ = __v >> 8;
- *__p++ = __v;
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_4_le(__u32 __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- __put_unaligned_2_le(__v >> 16, __p + 2);
- __put_unaligned_2_le(__v, __p);
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_4_be(__u32 __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- __put_unaligned_2_be(__v >> 16, __p);
- __put_unaligned_2_be(__v, __p + 2);
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_8_le(const unsigned long long __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- /*
- * tradeoff: 8 bytes of stack for all unaligned puts (2
- * instructions), or an extra register in the long long
- * case - go for the extra register.
- */
- __put_unaligned_4_le(__v >> 32, __p+4);
- __put_unaligned_4_le(__v, __p);
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_8_be(const unsigned long long __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- /*
- * tradeoff: 8 bytes of stack for all unaligned puts (2
- * instructions), or an extra register in the long long
- * case - go for the extra register.
- */
- __put_unaligned_4_be(__v >> 32, __p);
- __put_unaligned_4_be(__v, __p+4);
-}
-
-/*
- * Try to store an unaligned value as efficiently as possible.
- */
-#define __put_unaligned_le(val,ptr) \
- ({ \
- (void)sizeof(*(ptr) = (val)); \
- switch (sizeof(*(ptr))) { \
- case 1: \
- *(ptr) = (val); \
- break; \
- case 2: __put_unaligned_2_le((__force u16)(val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- case 4: __put_unaligned_4_le((__force u32)(val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- case 8: __put_unaligned_8_le((__force u64)(val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- default: __bug_unaligned_x(ptr); \
- break; \
- } \
- (void) 0; \
- })
-
-#define __put_unaligned_be(val,ptr) \
- ({ \
- (void)sizeof(*(ptr) = (val)); \
- switch (sizeof(*(ptr))) { \
- case 1: \
- *(ptr) = (val); \
- break; \
- case 2: __put_unaligned_2_be((__force u16)(val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- case 4: __put_unaligned_4_be((__force u32)(val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- case 8: __put_unaligned_8_be((__force u64)(val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- default: __bug_unaligned_x(ptr); \
- break; \
- } \
- (void) 0; \
- })
+#include <linux/unaligned/generic.h>
/*
* Select endianness
diff --git a/include/asm-v850/unaligned.h b/include/asm-v850/unaligned.h
index e30b186..09fc37c 100644
--- a/include/asm-v850/unaligned.h
+++ b/include/asm-v850/unaligned.h
@@ -17,114 +17,9 @@
#ifndef __V850_UNALIGNED_H__
#define __V850_UNALIGNED_H__
-#include <asm/types.h>
-
-extern int __bug_unaligned_x(void *ptr);
-
-/*
- * What is the most efficient way of loading/storing an unaligned value?
- *
- * That is the subject of this file. Efficiency here is defined as
- * minimum code size with minimum register usage for the common cases.
- * It is currently not believed that long longs are common, so we
- * trade efficiency for the chars, shorts and longs against the long
- * longs.
- *
- * Current stats with gcc 2.7.2.2 for these functions:
- *
- * ptrsize get: code regs put: code regs
- * 1 1 1 1 2
- * 2 3 2 3 2
- * 4 7 3 7 3
- * 8 20 6 16 6
- *
- * gcc 2.95.1 seems to code differently:
- *
- * ptrsize get: code regs put: code regs
- * 1 1 1 1 2
- * 2 3 2 3 2
- * 4 7 4 7 4
- * 8 19 8 15 6
- *
- * which may or may not be more efficient (depending upon whether
- * you can afford the extra registers). Hopefully the gcc 2.95
- * is inteligent enough to decide if it is better to use the
- * extra register, but evidence so far seems to suggest otherwise.
- *
- * Unfortunately, gcc is not able to optimise the high word
- * out of long long >> 32, or the low word from long long << 32
- */
-
-#define __get_unaligned_2(__p) \
- (__p[0] | __p[1] << 8)
-
-#define __get_unaligned_4(__p) \
- (__p[0] | __p[1] << 8 | __p[2] << 16 | __p[3] << 24)
-
-#define get_unaligned(ptr) \
- ({ \
- __typeof__(*(ptr)) __v; \
- __u8 *__p = (__u8 *)(ptr); \
- switch (sizeof(*(ptr))) { \
- case 1: __v = *(ptr); break; \
- case 2: __v = __get_unaligned_2(__p); break; \
- case 4: __v = __get_unaligned_4(__p); break; \
- case 8: { \
- unsigned int __v1, __v2; \
- __v2 = __get_unaligned_4((__p+4)); \
- __v1 = __get_unaligned_4(__p); \
- __v = ((unsigned long long)__v2 << 32 | __v1); \
- } \
- break; \
- default: __v = __bug_unaligned_x(__p); break; \
- } \
- __v; \
- })
-
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_2(__u32 __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- *__p++ = __v;
- *__p++ = __v >> 8;
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_4(__u32 __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- __put_unaligned_2(__v >> 16, __p + 2);
- __put_unaligned_2(__v, __p);
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_8(const unsigned long long __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- /*
- * tradeoff: 8 bytes of stack for all unaligned puts (2
- * instructions), or an extra register in the long long
- * case - go for the extra register.
- */
- __put_unaligned_4(__v >> 32, __p+4);
- __put_unaligned_4(__v, __p);
-}
-
-/*
- * Try to store an unaligned value as efficiently as possible.
- */
-#define put_unaligned(val,ptr) \
- ({ \
- switch (sizeof(*(ptr))) { \
- case 1: \
- *(ptr) = (val); \
- break; \
- case 2: __put_unaligned_2((val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- case 4: __put_unaligned_4((val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- case 8: __put_unaligned_8((val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- default: __bug_unaligned_x(ptr); \
- break; \
- } \
- (void) 0; \
- })
+#include <linux/unaligned/generic.h>
+#define get_unaligned __get_unaligned_le
+#define put_unaligned __put_unaligned_le
#endif /* __V850_UNALIGNED_H__ */
--
1.5.5.144.g3e42
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>
Subject: [PATCH 5/8] kernel: move arches the use the generic byteshifting implemetation
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 12:44:08 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1207856648.22001.29.camel@brick> (raw)
Message-ID: <20080410194408.Mh8UO4QoyHL0edY0A0e4SgEaAB2b1KPsJd9kjBB4Pro@z> (raw)
arm chooses endianness based on compiler settings.
v850 is le, but does not use the generic c-struct implementation and
uses the byteshifting for both be and le.
Signed-off-by: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>
---
include/asm-arm/unaligned.h | 166 +-----------------------------------------
include/asm-v850/unaligned.h | 111 +---------------------------
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 273 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/asm-arm/unaligned.h b/include/asm-arm/unaligned.h
index 5db03cf..d5cf478 100644
--- a/include/asm-arm/unaligned.h
+++ b/include/asm-arm/unaligned.h
@@ -1,171 +1,7 @@
#ifndef __ASM_ARM_UNALIGNED_H
#define __ASM_ARM_UNALIGNED_H
-#include <asm/types.h>
-
-extern int __bug_unaligned_x(const void *ptr);
-
-/*
- * What is the most efficient way of loading/storing an unaligned value?
- *
- * That is the subject of this file. Efficiency here is defined as
- * minimum code size with minimum register usage for the common cases.
- * It is currently not believed that long longs are common, so we
- * trade efficiency for the chars, shorts and longs against the long
- * longs.
- *
- * Current stats with gcc 2.7.2.2 for these functions:
- *
- * ptrsize get: code regs put: code regs
- * 1 1 1 1 2
- * 2 3 2 3 2
- * 4 7 3 7 3
- * 8 20 6 16 6
- *
- * gcc 2.95.1 seems to code differently:
- *
- * ptrsize get: code regs put: code regs
- * 1 1 1 1 2
- * 2 3 2 3 2
- * 4 7 4 7 4
- * 8 19 8 15 6
- *
- * which may or may not be more efficient (depending upon whether
- * you can afford the extra registers). Hopefully the gcc 2.95
- * is inteligent enough to decide if it is better to use the
- * extra register, but evidence so far seems to suggest otherwise.
- *
- * Unfortunately, gcc is not able to optimise the high word
- * out of long long >> 32, or the low word from long long << 32
- */
-
-#define __get_unaligned_2_le(__p) \
- (unsigned int)(__p[0] | __p[1] << 8)
-
-#define __get_unaligned_2_be(__p) \
- (unsigned int)(__p[0] << 8 | __p[1])
-
-#define __get_unaligned_4_le(__p) \
- (unsigned int)(__p[0] | __p[1] << 8 | __p[2] << 16 | __p[3] << 24)
-
-#define __get_unaligned_4_be(__p) \
- (unsigned int)(__p[0] << 24 | __p[1] << 16 | __p[2] << 8 | __p[3])
-
-#define __get_unaligned_8_le(__p) \
- ((unsigned long long)__get_unaligned_4_le((__p+4)) << 32 | \
- __get_unaligned_4_le(__p))
-
-#define __get_unaligned_8_be(__p) \
- ((unsigned long long)__get_unaligned_4_be(__p) << 32 | \
- __get_unaligned_4_be((__p+4)))
-
-#define __get_unaligned_le(ptr) \
- ((__force typeof(*(ptr)))({ \
- const __u8 *__p = (const __u8 *)(ptr); \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 1, *__p, \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 2, __get_unaligned_2_le(__p), \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 4, __get_unaligned_4_le(__p), \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 8, __get_unaligned_8_le(__p), \
- (void)__bug_unaligned_x(__p))))); \
- }))
-
-#define __get_unaligned_be(ptr) \
- ((__force typeof(*(ptr)))({ \
- const __u8 *__p = (const __u8 *)(ptr); \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 1, *__p, \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 2, __get_unaligned_2_be(__p), \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 4, __get_unaligned_4_be(__p), \
- __builtin_choose_expr(sizeof(*(ptr)) == 8, __get_unaligned_8_be(__p), \
- (void)__bug_unaligned_x(__p))))); \
- }))
-
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_2_le(__u32 __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- *__p++ = __v;
- *__p++ = __v >> 8;
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_2_be(__u32 __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- *__p++ = __v >> 8;
- *__p++ = __v;
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_4_le(__u32 __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- __put_unaligned_2_le(__v >> 16, __p + 2);
- __put_unaligned_2_le(__v, __p);
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_4_be(__u32 __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- __put_unaligned_2_be(__v >> 16, __p);
- __put_unaligned_2_be(__v, __p + 2);
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_8_le(const unsigned long long __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- /*
- * tradeoff: 8 bytes of stack for all unaligned puts (2
- * instructions), or an extra register in the long long
- * case - go for the extra register.
- */
- __put_unaligned_4_le(__v >> 32, __p+4);
- __put_unaligned_4_le(__v, __p);
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_8_be(const unsigned long long __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- /*
- * tradeoff: 8 bytes of stack for all unaligned puts (2
- * instructions), or an extra register in the long long
- * case - go for the extra register.
- */
- __put_unaligned_4_be(__v >> 32, __p);
- __put_unaligned_4_be(__v, __p+4);
-}
-
-/*
- * Try to store an unaligned value as efficiently as possible.
- */
-#define __put_unaligned_le(val,ptr) \
- ({ \
- (void)sizeof(*(ptr) = (val)); \
- switch (sizeof(*(ptr))) { \
- case 1: \
- *(ptr) = (val); \
- break; \
- case 2: __put_unaligned_2_le((__force u16)(val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- case 4: __put_unaligned_4_le((__force u32)(val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- case 8: __put_unaligned_8_le((__force u64)(val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- default: __bug_unaligned_x(ptr); \
- break; \
- } \
- (void) 0; \
- })
-
-#define __put_unaligned_be(val,ptr) \
- ({ \
- (void)sizeof(*(ptr) = (val)); \
- switch (sizeof(*(ptr))) { \
- case 1: \
- *(ptr) = (val); \
- break; \
- case 2: __put_unaligned_2_be((__force u16)(val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- case 4: __put_unaligned_4_be((__force u32)(val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- case 8: __put_unaligned_8_be((__force u64)(val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- default: __bug_unaligned_x(ptr); \
- break; \
- } \
- (void) 0; \
- })
+#include <linux/unaligned/generic.h>
/*
* Select endianness
diff --git a/include/asm-v850/unaligned.h b/include/asm-v850/unaligned.h
index e30b186..09fc37c 100644
--- a/include/asm-v850/unaligned.h
+++ b/include/asm-v850/unaligned.h
@@ -17,114 +17,9 @@
#ifndef __V850_UNALIGNED_H__
#define __V850_UNALIGNED_H__
-#include <asm/types.h>
-
-extern int __bug_unaligned_x(void *ptr);
-
-/*
- * What is the most efficient way of loading/storing an unaligned value?
- *
- * That is the subject of this file. Efficiency here is defined as
- * minimum code size with minimum register usage for the common cases.
- * It is currently not believed that long longs are common, so we
- * trade efficiency for the chars, shorts and longs against the long
- * longs.
- *
- * Current stats with gcc 2.7.2.2 for these functions:
- *
- * ptrsize get: code regs put: code regs
- * 1 1 1 1 2
- * 2 3 2 3 2
- * 4 7 3 7 3
- * 8 20 6 16 6
- *
- * gcc 2.95.1 seems to code differently:
- *
- * ptrsize get: code regs put: code regs
- * 1 1 1 1 2
- * 2 3 2 3 2
- * 4 7 4 7 4
- * 8 19 8 15 6
- *
- * which may or may not be more efficient (depending upon whether
- * you can afford the extra registers). Hopefully the gcc 2.95
- * is inteligent enough to decide if it is better to use the
- * extra register, but evidence so far seems to suggest otherwise.
- *
- * Unfortunately, gcc is not able to optimise the high word
- * out of long long >> 32, or the low word from long long << 32
- */
-
-#define __get_unaligned_2(__p) \
- (__p[0] | __p[1] << 8)
-
-#define __get_unaligned_4(__p) \
- (__p[0] | __p[1] << 8 | __p[2] << 16 | __p[3] << 24)
-
-#define get_unaligned(ptr) \
- ({ \
- __typeof__(*(ptr)) __v; \
- __u8 *__p = (__u8 *)(ptr); \
- switch (sizeof(*(ptr))) { \
- case 1: __v = *(ptr); break; \
- case 2: __v = __get_unaligned_2(__p); break; \
- case 4: __v = __get_unaligned_4(__p); break; \
- case 8: { \
- unsigned int __v1, __v2; \
- __v2 = __get_unaligned_4((__p+4)); \
- __v1 = __get_unaligned_4(__p); \
- __v = ((unsigned long long)__v2 << 32 | __v1); \
- } \
- break; \
- default: __v = __bug_unaligned_x(__p); break; \
- } \
- __v; \
- })
-
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_2(__u32 __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- *__p++ = __v;
- *__p++ = __v >> 8;
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_4(__u32 __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- __put_unaligned_2(__v >> 16, __p + 2);
- __put_unaligned_2(__v, __p);
-}
-
-static inline void __put_unaligned_8(const unsigned long long __v, register __u8 *__p)
-{
- /*
- * tradeoff: 8 bytes of stack for all unaligned puts (2
- * instructions), or an extra register in the long long
- * case - go for the extra register.
- */
- __put_unaligned_4(__v >> 32, __p+4);
- __put_unaligned_4(__v, __p);
-}
-
-/*
- * Try to store an unaligned value as efficiently as possible.
- */
-#define put_unaligned(val,ptr) \
- ({ \
- switch (sizeof(*(ptr))) { \
- case 1: \
- *(ptr) = (val); \
- break; \
- case 2: __put_unaligned_2((val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- case 4: __put_unaligned_4((val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- case 8: __put_unaligned_8((val),(__u8 *)(ptr)); \
- break; \
- default: __bug_unaligned_x(ptr); \
- break; \
- } \
- (void) 0; \
- })
+#include <linux/unaligned/generic.h>
+#define get_unaligned __get_unaligned_le
+#define put_unaligned __put_unaligned_le
#endif /* __V850_UNALIGNED_H__ */
--
1.5.5.144.g3e42
next reply other threads:[~2008-04-10 19:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-10 19:44 Harvey Harrison [this message]
2008-04-10 19:44 ` [PATCH 5/8] kernel: move arches the use the generic byteshifting implemetation Harvey Harrison
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=1207856648.22001.29.camel@brick \
--to=harvey.harrison-re5jqeeqqe8avxtiumwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-arch-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=rmk-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.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.