From: Neal Liu <neal.liu@mediatek.com>
To: Chun-Kuang Hu <chunkuang.hu@kernel.org>
Cc: "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
wsd_upstream <wsd_upstream@mediatek.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] soc: mediatek: devapc: add devapc-mt6873 driver
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 17:26:03 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1591867563.27949.9.camel@mtkswgap22> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAOTY__g3Fnwsoqx=x_tgdMii5K_L9TmF_9048XbAOSJwb-Cxg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 2020-06-10 at 00:01 +0800, Chun-Kuang Hu wrote:
Hi Chun-Kuang,
[snip]
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * mtk_devapc_pd_get - get devapc pd_types of register address.
> > + *
> > + * Returns the value of reg addr
> > + */
> > +static void __iomem *mtk_devapc_pd_get(int slave_type,
> > + enum DEVAPC_PD_REG_TYPE pd_reg_type,
> > + u32 index)
> > +{
> > + struct mtk_devapc_vio_info *vio_info = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->vio_info;
> > + u32 slave_type_num = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->slave_type_num;
> > + const u32 *devapc_pds = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->devapc_pds;
> > + void __iomem *reg;
> > +
> > + if (!devapc_pds)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + if ((slave_type < slave_type_num &&
> > + index < vio_info->vio_mask_sta_num[slave_type]) &&
> > + pd_reg_type < PD_REG_TYPE_NUM) {
> > + reg = mtk_devapc_ctx->devapc_pd_base[slave_type] +
> > + devapc_pds[pd_reg_type];
> > +
> > + if (pd_reg_type == VIO_MASK || pd_reg_type == VIO_STA)
> > + reg += 0x4 * index;
> > +
> > + } else {
> > + pr_err(PFX "%s:0x%x or %s:0x%x or %s:0x%x is out of boundary\n",
> > + "slave_type", slave_type,
>
> Move "slave_type" into format string.
Why is this necessary? Is there any benefit for moving this?
Since the line length is almost over 80 chars.
>
> > + "pd_reg_type", pd_reg_type,
> > + "index", index);
> > + return NULL;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return reg;
> > +}
> > +
>
[snip]
>
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * devapc_violation_irq - the devapc Interrupt Service Routine (ISR) will dump
> > + * violation information including which master violates
> > + * access slave.
> > + */
> > +static irqreturn_t devapc_violation_irq(int irq_number, void *dev_id)
> > +{
> > + u32 slave_type_num = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->slave_type_num;
> > + const struct mtk_device_info **device_info;
> > + struct mtk_devapc_vio_info *vio_info;
> > + int slave_type, vio_idx, index;
> > + const char *vio_master;
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > + bool normal;
> > + u8 perm;
> > +
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&devapc_lock, flags);
> > +
> > + device_info = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->device_info;
> > + vio_info = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->vio_info;
> > + normal = false;
> > + vio_idx = -1;
> > + index = -1;
> > +
> > + /* There are multiple DEVAPC_PD */
> > + for (slave_type = 0; slave_type < slave_type_num; slave_type++) {
> > + if (!check_type2_vio_status(slave_type, &vio_idx, &index))
> > + if (!mtk_devapc_dump_vio_dbg(slave_type, &vio_idx,
> > + &index))
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + /* Ensure that violation info are written before
> > + * further operations
> > + */
> > + smp_mb();
> > + normal = true;
> > +
> > + mask_module_irq(slave_type, vio_idx, true);
> > +
> > + if (clear_vio_status(slave_type, vio_idx))
> > + pr_warn(PFX "%s, %s:0x%x, %s:0x%x\n",
> > + "clear vio status failed",
> > + "slave_type", slave_type,
> > + "vio_index", vio_idx);
> > +
> > + perm = get_permission(slave_type, index, vio_info->domain_id);
> > +
> > + vio_master = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->master_get
> > + (vio_info->master_id,
> > + vio_info->vio_addr,
> > + slave_type,
> > + vio_info->shift_sta_bit,
> > + vio_info->domain_id);
>
> Call mt6873_bus_id_to_master() directly. For first patch, make things
> as simple as possible.
In devapc_violation_irq() function, we use common flow to handle each
devapc violation on different platforms. The master_get() has different
implementation on different platforms, that why it called indirectly.
Once we have new platform, we only have to update devapc-mtxxxx.c
instead of common handler flow.
>
> > +
> > + if (!vio_master) {
> > + pr_warn(PFX "master_get failed\n");
> > + vio_master = "UNKNOWN_MASTER";
> > + }
> > +
> > + pr_info(PFX "%s - %s:0x%x, %s:0x%x, %s:0x%x, %s:0x%x\n",
> > + "Violation", "slave_type", slave_type,
> > + "sys_index",
> > + device_info[slave_type][index].sys_index,
> > + "ctrl_index",
> > + device_info[slave_type][index].ctrl_index,
> > + "vio_index",
> > + device_info[slave_type][index].vio_index);
> > +
> > + pr_info(PFX "%s %s %s %s\n",
> > + "Violation - master:", vio_master,
> > + "access violation slave:",
> > + device_info[slave_type][index].device);
> > +
> > + devapc_vio_reason(perm);
> > +
> > + devapc_extra_handler(slave_type, vio_master, vio_idx,
> > + vio_info->vio_addr);
> > +
> > + mask_module_irq(slave_type, vio_idx, false);
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (normal) {
> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devapc_lock, flags);
> > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > + }
> > +
> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devapc_lock, flags);
> > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > +}
> > +
[snip]
_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Neal Liu <neal.liu@mediatek.com>
To: Chun-Kuang Hu <chunkuang.hu@kernel.org>
Cc: "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
wsd_upstream <wsd_upstream@mediatek.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] soc: mediatek: devapc: add devapc-mt6873 driver
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 17:26:03 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1591867563.27949.9.camel@mtkswgap22> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAOTY__g3Fnwsoqx=x_tgdMii5K_L9TmF_9048XbAOSJwb-Cxg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 2020-06-10 at 00:01 +0800, Chun-Kuang Hu wrote:
Hi Chun-Kuang,
[snip]
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * mtk_devapc_pd_get - get devapc pd_types of register address.
> > + *
> > + * Returns the value of reg addr
> > + */
> > +static void __iomem *mtk_devapc_pd_get(int slave_type,
> > + enum DEVAPC_PD_REG_TYPE pd_reg_type,
> > + u32 index)
> > +{
> > + struct mtk_devapc_vio_info *vio_info = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->vio_info;
> > + u32 slave_type_num = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->slave_type_num;
> > + const u32 *devapc_pds = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->devapc_pds;
> > + void __iomem *reg;
> > +
> > + if (!devapc_pds)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + if ((slave_type < slave_type_num &&
> > + index < vio_info->vio_mask_sta_num[slave_type]) &&
> > + pd_reg_type < PD_REG_TYPE_NUM) {
> > + reg = mtk_devapc_ctx->devapc_pd_base[slave_type] +
> > + devapc_pds[pd_reg_type];
> > +
> > + if (pd_reg_type == VIO_MASK || pd_reg_type == VIO_STA)
> > + reg += 0x4 * index;
> > +
> > + } else {
> > + pr_err(PFX "%s:0x%x or %s:0x%x or %s:0x%x is out of boundary\n",
> > + "slave_type", slave_type,
>
> Move "slave_type" into format string.
Why is this necessary? Is there any benefit for moving this?
Since the line length is almost over 80 chars.
>
> > + "pd_reg_type", pd_reg_type,
> > + "index", index);
> > + return NULL;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return reg;
> > +}
> > +
>
[snip]
>
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * devapc_violation_irq - the devapc Interrupt Service Routine (ISR) will dump
> > + * violation information including which master violates
> > + * access slave.
> > + */
> > +static irqreturn_t devapc_violation_irq(int irq_number, void *dev_id)
> > +{
> > + u32 slave_type_num = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->slave_type_num;
> > + const struct mtk_device_info **device_info;
> > + struct mtk_devapc_vio_info *vio_info;
> > + int slave_type, vio_idx, index;
> > + const char *vio_master;
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > + bool normal;
> > + u8 perm;
> > +
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&devapc_lock, flags);
> > +
> > + device_info = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->device_info;
> > + vio_info = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->vio_info;
> > + normal = false;
> > + vio_idx = -1;
> > + index = -1;
> > +
> > + /* There are multiple DEVAPC_PD */
> > + for (slave_type = 0; slave_type < slave_type_num; slave_type++) {
> > + if (!check_type2_vio_status(slave_type, &vio_idx, &index))
> > + if (!mtk_devapc_dump_vio_dbg(slave_type, &vio_idx,
> > + &index))
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + /* Ensure that violation info are written before
> > + * further operations
> > + */
> > + smp_mb();
> > + normal = true;
> > +
> > + mask_module_irq(slave_type, vio_idx, true);
> > +
> > + if (clear_vio_status(slave_type, vio_idx))
> > + pr_warn(PFX "%s, %s:0x%x, %s:0x%x\n",
> > + "clear vio status failed",
> > + "slave_type", slave_type,
> > + "vio_index", vio_idx);
> > +
> > + perm = get_permission(slave_type, index, vio_info->domain_id);
> > +
> > + vio_master = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->master_get
> > + (vio_info->master_id,
> > + vio_info->vio_addr,
> > + slave_type,
> > + vio_info->shift_sta_bit,
> > + vio_info->domain_id);
>
> Call mt6873_bus_id_to_master() directly. For first patch, make things
> as simple as possible.
In devapc_violation_irq() function, we use common flow to handle each
devapc violation on different platforms. The master_get() has different
implementation on different platforms, that why it called indirectly.
Once we have new platform, we only have to update devapc-mtxxxx.c
instead of common handler flow.
>
> > +
> > + if (!vio_master) {
> > + pr_warn(PFX "master_get failed\n");
> > + vio_master = "UNKNOWN_MASTER";
> > + }
> > +
> > + pr_info(PFX "%s - %s:0x%x, %s:0x%x, %s:0x%x, %s:0x%x\n",
> > + "Violation", "slave_type", slave_type,
> > + "sys_index",
> > + device_info[slave_type][index].sys_index,
> > + "ctrl_index",
> > + device_info[slave_type][index].ctrl_index,
> > + "vio_index",
> > + device_info[slave_type][index].vio_index);
> > +
> > + pr_info(PFX "%s %s %s %s\n",
> > + "Violation - master:", vio_master,
> > + "access violation slave:",
> > + device_info[slave_type][index].device);
> > +
> > + devapc_vio_reason(perm);
> > +
> > + devapc_extra_handler(slave_type, vio_master, vio_idx,
> > + vio_info->vio_addr);
> > +
> > + mask_module_irq(slave_type, vio_idx, false);
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (normal) {
> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devapc_lock, flags);
> > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > + }
> > +
> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devapc_lock, flags);
> > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > +}
> > +
[snip]
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Neal Liu <neal.liu@mediatek.com>
To: Chun-Kuang Hu <chunkuang.hu@kernel.org>
Cc: "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
wsd_upstream <wsd_upstream@mediatek.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] soc: mediatek: devapc: add devapc-mt6873 driver
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 17:26:03 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1591867563.27949.9.camel@mtkswgap22> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAOTY__g3Fnwsoqx=x_tgdMii5K_L9TmF_9048XbAOSJwb-Cxg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 2020-06-10 at 00:01 +0800, Chun-Kuang Hu wrote:
Hi Chun-Kuang,
[snip]
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * mtk_devapc_pd_get - get devapc pd_types of register address.
> > + *
> > + * Returns the value of reg addr
> > + */
> > +static void __iomem *mtk_devapc_pd_get(int slave_type,
> > + enum DEVAPC_PD_REG_TYPE pd_reg_type,
> > + u32 index)
> > +{
> > + struct mtk_devapc_vio_info *vio_info = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->vio_info;
> > + u32 slave_type_num = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->slave_type_num;
> > + const u32 *devapc_pds = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->devapc_pds;
> > + void __iomem *reg;
> > +
> > + if (!devapc_pds)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + if ((slave_type < slave_type_num &&
> > + index < vio_info->vio_mask_sta_num[slave_type]) &&
> > + pd_reg_type < PD_REG_TYPE_NUM) {
> > + reg = mtk_devapc_ctx->devapc_pd_base[slave_type] +
> > + devapc_pds[pd_reg_type];
> > +
> > + if (pd_reg_type == VIO_MASK || pd_reg_type == VIO_STA)
> > + reg += 0x4 * index;
> > +
> > + } else {
> > + pr_err(PFX "%s:0x%x or %s:0x%x or %s:0x%x is out of boundary\n",
> > + "slave_type", slave_type,
>
> Move "slave_type" into format string.
Why is this necessary? Is there any benefit for moving this?
Since the line length is almost over 80 chars.
>
> > + "pd_reg_type", pd_reg_type,
> > + "index", index);
> > + return NULL;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return reg;
> > +}
> > +
>
[snip]
>
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * devapc_violation_irq - the devapc Interrupt Service Routine (ISR) will dump
> > + * violation information including which master violates
> > + * access slave.
> > + */
> > +static irqreturn_t devapc_violation_irq(int irq_number, void *dev_id)
> > +{
> > + u32 slave_type_num = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->slave_type_num;
> > + const struct mtk_device_info **device_info;
> > + struct mtk_devapc_vio_info *vio_info;
> > + int slave_type, vio_idx, index;
> > + const char *vio_master;
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > + bool normal;
> > + u8 perm;
> > +
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&devapc_lock, flags);
> > +
> > + device_info = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->device_info;
> > + vio_info = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->vio_info;
> > + normal = false;
> > + vio_idx = -1;
> > + index = -1;
> > +
> > + /* There are multiple DEVAPC_PD */
> > + for (slave_type = 0; slave_type < slave_type_num; slave_type++) {
> > + if (!check_type2_vio_status(slave_type, &vio_idx, &index))
> > + if (!mtk_devapc_dump_vio_dbg(slave_type, &vio_idx,
> > + &index))
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + /* Ensure that violation info are written before
> > + * further operations
> > + */
> > + smp_mb();
> > + normal = true;
> > +
> > + mask_module_irq(slave_type, vio_idx, true);
> > +
> > + if (clear_vio_status(slave_type, vio_idx))
> > + pr_warn(PFX "%s, %s:0x%x, %s:0x%x\n",
> > + "clear vio status failed",
> > + "slave_type", slave_type,
> > + "vio_index", vio_idx);
> > +
> > + perm = get_permission(slave_type, index, vio_info->domain_id);
> > +
> > + vio_master = mtk_devapc_ctx->soc->master_get
> > + (vio_info->master_id,
> > + vio_info->vio_addr,
> > + slave_type,
> > + vio_info->shift_sta_bit,
> > + vio_info->domain_id);
>
> Call mt6873_bus_id_to_master() directly. For first patch, make things
> as simple as possible.
In devapc_violation_irq() function, we use common flow to handle each
devapc violation on different platforms. The master_get() has different
implementation on different platforms, that why it called indirectly.
Once we have new platform, we only have to update devapc-mtxxxx.c
instead of common handler flow.
>
> > +
> > + if (!vio_master) {
> > + pr_warn(PFX "master_get failed\n");
> > + vio_master = "UNKNOWN_MASTER";
> > + }
> > +
> > + pr_info(PFX "%s - %s:0x%x, %s:0x%x, %s:0x%x, %s:0x%x\n",
> > + "Violation", "slave_type", slave_type,
> > + "sys_index",
> > + device_info[slave_type][index].sys_index,
> > + "ctrl_index",
> > + device_info[slave_type][index].ctrl_index,
> > + "vio_index",
> > + device_info[slave_type][index].vio_index);
> > +
> > + pr_info(PFX "%s %s %s %s\n",
> > + "Violation - master:", vio_master,
> > + "access violation slave:",
> > + device_info[slave_type][index].device);
> > +
> > + devapc_vio_reason(perm);
> > +
> > + devapc_extra_handler(slave_type, vio_master, vio_idx,
> > + vio_info->vio_addr);
> > +
> > + mask_module_irq(slave_type, vio_idx, false);
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (normal) {
> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devapc_lock, flags);
> > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > + }
> > +
> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&devapc_lock, flags);
> > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > +}
> > +
[snip]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-11 9:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-09 10:24 Add MediaTek MT6873 devapc driver Neal Liu
2020-06-09 10:24 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-09 10:24 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-09 10:24 ` [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: devapc: add bindings for devapc-mt6873 Neal Liu
2020-06-09 10:24 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-09 10:24 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-09 17:27 ` Rob Herring
2020-06-09 17:27 ` Rob Herring
2020-06-09 17:27 ` Rob Herring
2020-06-09 10:24 ` [PATCH 2/2] soc: mediatek: devapc: add devapc-mt6873 driver Neal Liu
2020-06-09 10:24 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-09 16:01 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-09 16:01 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-09 16:01 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-11 9:26 ` Neal Liu [this message]
2020-06-11 9:26 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-11 9:26 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-11 11:01 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-11 11:01 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-11 11:01 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-12 3:04 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-12 3:04 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-12 3:04 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-12 15:27 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-12 15:27 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-12 15:27 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-15 2:12 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-15 2:12 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-15 2:12 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-12 23:20 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-12 23:20 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-12 23:20 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-16 6:45 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-16 6:45 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-16 6:45 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-14 3:26 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-14 3:26 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-14 3:26 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-15 2:43 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-15 2:43 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-15 2:43 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-15 14:14 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-15 14:14 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-15 14:14 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-15 14:17 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-15 14:17 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-15 14:17 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-16 6:09 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-16 6:09 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-16 6:09 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-15 15:51 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-15 15:51 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-15 15:51 ` Chun-Kuang Hu
2020-06-16 6:19 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-16 6:19 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-16 6:19 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-09 17:32 ` Add MediaTek MT6873 devapc driver Rob Herring
2020-06-09 17:32 ` Rob Herring
2020-06-09 17:32 ` Rob Herring
2020-06-24 3:51 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-24 3:51 ` Neal Liu
2020-06-24 3:51 ` Neal Liu
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=1591867563.27949.9.camel@mtkswgap22 \
--to=neal.liu@mediatek.com \
--cc=chunkuang.hu@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=wsd_upstream@mediatek.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 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.