From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
To: Andrew Volkov <Andrew.Volkov@transas.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PROBLEM: possible proceses leak
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 10:25:00 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031208182500.GL8039@holomorphy.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2E74F312D6980D459F3A05492BA40F8D0391B0E9@clue.transas.com>
On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 09:01:40PM +0300, Andrew Volkov wrote:
> In all kernels (up to 2.6-test11) next sequence of code
> in __down/__down_interruptible function
> (arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c) may cause processes or threads leaking.
Something like this?
-- wli
===== arch/alpha/kernel/semaphore.c 1.5 vs edited =====
--- 1.5/arch/alpha/kernel/semaphore.c Thu Apr 3 14:49:57 2003
+++ edited/arch/alpha/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:19:08 2003
@@ -62,9 +62,9 @@
current->comm, current->pid, sem);
#endif
+ add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
current->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
wmb();
- add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
/* At this point we know that sem->count is negative. In order
to avoid racing with __up, we must check for wakeup before
@@ -94,8 +94,8 @@
set_task_state(current, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
current->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SEMAPHORE
printk("%s(%d): down acquired(%p)\n",
@@ -114,9 +114,9 @@
current->comm, current->pid, sem);
#endif
+ add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
wmb();
- add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
while (1) {
long tmp, tmp2, tmp3;
@@ -181,8 +181,8 @@
set_task_state(current, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
current->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SEMAPHORE
===== arch/arm/kernel/semaphore.c 1.8 vs edited =====
--- 1.8/arch/arm/kernel/semaphore.c Sat Sep 20 02:38:17 2003
+++ edited/arch/arm/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:19:27 2003
@@ -58,8 +58,8 @@
{
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers++;
@@ -82,8 +82,8 @@
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
}
spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
}
@@ -92,8 +92,8 @@
int retval = 0;
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers ++;
===== arch/arm26/kernel/semaphore.c 1.1 vs edited =====
--- 1.1/arch/arm26/kernel/semaphore.c Wed Jun 4 04:15:45 2003
+++ edited/arch/arm26/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:19:41 2003
@@ -60,8 +60,8 @@
{
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers++;
@@ -84,8 +84,8 @@
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
}
spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
}
@@ -94,8 +94,8 @@
int retval = 0;
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers ++;
===== arch/cris/kernel/semaphore.c 1.2 vs edited =====
--- 1.2/arch/cris/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Feb 4 23:39:23 2002
+++ edited/arch/cris/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:17:51 2003
@@ -68,8 +68,8 @@
#define DOWN_HEAD(task_state) \
\
\
- tsk->state = (task_state); \
add_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
+ tsk->state = (task_state); \
\
/* \
* Ok, we're set up. sem->count is known to be less than zero \
@@ -91,8 +91,8 @@
#define DOWN_TAIL(task_state) \
tsk->state = (task_state); \
} \
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING; \
remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING; \
void __down(struct semaphore * sem)
{
===== arch/h8300/kernel/semaphore.c 1.1 vs edited =====
--- 1.1/arch/h8300/kernel/semaphore.c Sun Feb 16 16:01:58 2003
+++ edited/arch/h8300/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:18:07 2003
@@ -69,8 +69,8 @@
#define DOWN_HEAD(task_state) \
\
\
- current->state = (task_state); \
add_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
+ current->state = (task_state); \
\
/* \
* Ok, we're set up. sem->count is known to be less than zero \
===== arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c 1.8 vs edited =====
--- 1.8/arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c Thu Nov 21 09:55:02 2002
+++ edited/arch/i386/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:18:43 2003
@@ -59,9 +59,9 @@
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
unsigned long flags;
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
sem->sleepers++;
for (;;) {
@@ -84,10 +84,10 @@
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
}
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
}
int __down_interruptible(struct semaphore * sem)
@@ -97,9 +97,9 @@
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
unsigned long flags;
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
sem->sleepers++;
for (;;) {
@@ -137,11 +137,11 @@
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
}
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
return retval;
}
===== arch/ia64/kernel/semaphore.c 1.4 vs edited =====
--- 1.4/arch/ia64/kernel/semaphore.c Sat Aug 31 06:16:01 2002
+++ edited/arch/ia64/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:20:25 2003
@@ -51,9 +51,9 @@
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
unsigned long flags;
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
sem->sleepers++;
for (;;) {
@@ -76,10 +76,10 @@
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
}
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
}
int
@@ -90,9 +90,9 @@
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
unsigned long flags;
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
sem->sleepers ++;
for (;;) {
@@ -130,11 +130,11 @@
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
}
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
return retval;
}
===== arch/m68k/kernel/semaphore.c 1.2 vs edited =====
--- 1.2/arch/m68k/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Feb 4 23:39:24 2002
+++ edited/arch/m68k/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:21:00 2003
@@ -69,8 +69,8 @@
#define DOWN_HEAD(task_state) \
\
\
- current->state = (task_state); \
add_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
+ current->state = (task_state); \
\
/* \
* Ok, we're set up. sem->count is known to be less than zero \
===== arch/m68knommu/kernel/semaphore.c 1.1 vs edited =====
--- 1.1/arch/m68knommu/kernel/semaphore.c Fri Nov 1 07:19:55 2002
+++ edited/arch/m68knommu/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:21:10 2003
@@ -70,8 +70,8 @@
#define DOWN_HEAD(task_state) \
\
\
- current->state = (task_state); \
add_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
+ current->state = (task_state); \
\
/* \
* Ok, we're set up. sem->count is known to be less than zero \
===== arch/mips/kernel/semaphore.c 1.2 vs edited =====
--- 1.2/arch/mips/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Feb 4 23:39:24 2002
+++ edited/arch/mips/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:21:19 2003
@@ -68,8 +68,8 @@
#define DOWN_HEAD(task_state) \
\
\
- tsk->state = (task_state); \
add_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
+ tsk->state = (task_state); \
\
/* \
* Ok, we're set up. sem->count is known to be less than zero \
===== arch/parisc/kernel/semaphore.c 1.3 vs edited =====
--- 1.3/arch/parisc/kernel/semaphore.c Sun Jul 21 14:20:31 2002
+++ edited/arch/parisc/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:21:52 2003
@@ -49,8 +49,8 @@
spin_lock_irq(&sem->sentry); \
if (wakers(sem->count) == 0 && ret == 0) \
goto lost_race; /* Someone stole our wakeup */ \
- __remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
current->state = TASK_RUNNING; \
+ __remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
if (!waitqueue_active(&sem->wait) && (sem->count < 0)) \
sem->count = wakers(sem->count);
===== arch/ppc/kernel/semaphore.c 1.7 vs edited =====
--- 1.7/arch/ppc/kernel/semaphore.c Sun Sep 15 21:51:59 2002
+++ edited/arch/ppc/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:22:15 2003
@@ -74,8 +74,8 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
smp_wmb();
/*
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@
schedule();
tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
/*
* If there are any more sleepers, wake one of them up so
@@ -105,8 +105,8 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
smp_wmb();
while (__sem_update_count(sem, -1) <= 0) {
===== arch/ppc64/kernel/semaphore.c 1.3 vs edited =====
--- 1.3/arch/ppc64/kernel/semaphore.c Wed Aug 27 21:23:26 2003
+++ edited/arch/ppc64/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:22:33 2003
@@ -75,8 +75,8 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- __set_task_state(tsk, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ __set_task_state(tsk, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
/*
* Try to get the semaphore. If the count is > 0, then we've
@@ -88,8 +88,8 @@
schedule();
set_task_state(tsk, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
__set_task_state(tsk, TASK_RUNNING);
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
/*
* If there are any more sleepers, wake one of them up so
@@ -105,8 +105,8 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- __set_task_state(tsk, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ __set_task_state(tsk, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
while (__sem_update_count(sem, -1) <= 0) {
if (signal_pending(current)) {
@@ -122,8 +122,8 @@
schedule();
set_task_state(tsk, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
__set_task_state(tsk, TASK_RUNNING);
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
return retval;
===== arch/s390/kernel/semaphore.c 1.4 vs edited =====
--- 1.4/arch/s390/kernel/semaphore.c Wed Jun 5 10:43:26 2002
+++ edited/arch/s390/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:22:46 2003
@@ -64,14 +64,14 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
while (__sem_update_count(sem, -1) <= 0) {
schedule();
tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
}
@@ -87,8 +87,8 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
while (__sem_update_count(sem, -1) <= 0) {
if (signal_pending(current)) {
__sem_update_count(sem, 0);
@@ -98,8 +98,8 @@
schedule();
tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
return retval;
}
===== arch/sh/kernel/semaphore.c 1.3 vs edited =====
--- 1.3/arch/sh/kernel/semaphore.c Wed Apr 10 00:09:38 2002
+++ edited/arch/sh/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:22:54 2003
@@ -77,8 +77,8 @@
#define DOWN_HEAD(task_state) \
\
\
- tsk->state = (task_state); \
add_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait); \
+ tsk->state = (task_state); \
\
/* \
* Ok, we're set up. sem->count is known to be less than zero \
===== arch/sparc/kernel/semaphore.c 1.5 vs edited =====
--- 1.5/arch/sparc/kernel/semaphore.c Tue Jul 16 17:12:12 2002
+++ edited/arch/sparc/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:23:11 2003
@@ -49,8 +49,8 @@
{
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers++;
@@ -73,8 +73,8 @@
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
}
spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
}
===== arch/sparc64/kernel/semaphore.c 1.7 vs edited =====
--- 1.7/arch/sparc64/kernel/semaphore.c Wed Sep 3 23:40:12 2003
+++ edited/arch/sparc64/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:23:37 2003
@@ -95,15 +95,15 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
while (__sem_update_count(sem, -1) <= 0) {
schedule();
tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
}
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
}
@@ -198,8 +198,8 @@
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
while (__sem_update_count(sem, -1) <= 0) {
if (signal_pending(current)) {
===== arch/v850/kernel/semaphore.c 1.2 vs edited =====
--- 1.2/arch/v850/kernel/semaphore.c Wed Dec 18 18:20:47 2002
+++ edited/arch/v850/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:23:58 2003
@@ -60,8 +60,8 @@
{
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers++;
@@ -84,8 +84,8 @@
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
}
spin_unlock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
- remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
+ remove_wait_queue(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up(&sem->wait);
}
@@ -94,8 +94,8 @@
int retval = 0;
struct task_struct *tsk = current;
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
add_wait_queue_exclusive(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irq(&semaphore_lock);
sem->sleepers ++;
===== arch/x86_64/kernel/semaphore.c 1.3 vs edited =====
--- 1.3/arch/x86_64/kernel/semaphore.c Fri Oct 11 16:52:38 2002
+++ edited/arch/x86_64/kernel/semaphore.c Mon Dec 8 10:24:24 2003
@@ -60,9 +60,9 @@
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
unsigned long flags;
- tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
sem->sleepers++;
for (;;) {
@@ -85,10 +85,10 @@
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
tsk->state = TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE;
}
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
}
int __down_interruptible(struct semaphore * sem)
@@ -98,9 +98,9 @@
DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, tsk);
unsigned long flags;
- tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
add_wait_queue_exclusive_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
+ tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
sem->sleepers++;
for (;;) {
@@ -138,11 +138,11 @@
spin_lock_irqsave(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
tsk->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
}
+ tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
remove_wait_queue_locked(&sem->wait, &wait);
wake_up_locked(&sem->wait);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sem->wait.lock, flags);
- tsk->state = TASK_RUNNING;
return retval;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-12-08 18:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-12-08 18:01 PROBLEM: possible proceses leak Andrew Volkov
2003-12-08 18:25 ` William Lee Irwin III [this message]
2003-12-08 19:08 ` Linus Torvalds
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-12-08 18:45 Andrew Volkov
2003-12-08 18:51 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-12-08 19:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-12-08 19:23 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-12-08 19:34 Andrew Volkov
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=20031208182500.GL8039@holomorphy.com \
--to=wli@holomorphy.com \
--cc=Andrew.Volkov@transas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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.