All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCHv4 5/5] arm64: Add atomic pool for non-coherent and CMA allocations.
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 14:43:43 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140718134343.GA4608@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1404324218-4743-6-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org>

On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 07:03:38PM +0100, Laura Abbott wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c b/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
> index 4164c5a..a2487f1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
[...]
>  static void *__dma_alloc_coherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>  				  dma_addr_t *dma_handle, gfp_t flags,
>  				  struct dma_attrs *attrs)
> @@ -53,7 +103,8 @@ static void *__dma_alloc_coherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>  	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ZONE_DMA) &&
>  	    dev->coherent_dma_mask <= DMA_BIT_MASK(32))
>  		flags |= GFP_DMA;
> -	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_CMA)) {
> +
> +	if (!(flags & __GFP_WAIT) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_CMA)) {
>  		struct page *page;
>  
>  		size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);

I think that's the wrong condition here. You want to use CMA if
(flags & __GFP_WAIT). CMA does not support atomic allocations so it can
fall back to swiotlb_alloc_coherent().

> @@ -73,50 +124,56 @@ static void __dma_free_coherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>  				void *vaddr, dma_addr_t dma_handle,
>  				struct dma_attrs *attrs)
>  {
> +	bool freed;
> +	phys_addr_t paddr = dma_to_phys(dev, dma_handle);
> +
>  	if (dev == NULL) {
>  		WARN_ONCE(1, "Use an actual device structure for DMA allocation\n");
>  		return;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_CMA)) {
> -		phys_addr_t paddr = dma_to_phys(dev, dma_handle);
>  
> -		dma_release_from_contiguous(dev,
> +	freed = dma_release_from_contiguous(dev,
>  					phys_to_page(paddr),
>  					size >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> -	} else {
> +	if (!freed)
>  		swiotlb_free_coherent(dev, size, vaddr, dma_handle);
> -	}
>  }

Is __dma_free_coherent() ever called in atomic context? If yes, the
dma_release_from_contiguous() may not like it since it tries to acquire
a mutex. But since we don't have the gfp flags here, we don't have an
easy way to know what to call.

So the initial idea of always calling __alloc_from_pool() for both
coherent/non-coherent cases would work better (but still with a single
shared pool, see below).

>  static void *__dma_alloc_noncoherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>  				     dma_addr_t *dma_handle, gfp_t flags,
>  				     struct dma_attrs *attrs)
>  {
> -	struct page *page, **map;
> +	struct page *page;
>  	void *ptr, *coherent_ptr;
> -	int order, i;
>  
>  	size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);
> -	order = get_order(size);
> +
> +	if (!(flags & __GFP_WAIT)) {
> +		struct page *page = NULL;
> +		void *addr = __alloc_from_pool(size, &page);
> +
> +		if (addr)
> +			*dma_handle = phys_to_dma(dev, page_to_phys(page));
> +
> +		return addr;
> +
> +	}

If we do the above for the __dma_alloc_coherent() case, we could use the
same pool but instead of returning addr it could just return
page_address(page). The downside of sharing the pool is that you need
cache flushing for every allocation (which we already do for the
non-atomic case).

> @@ -332,6 +391,67 @@ static struct notifier_block amba_bus_nb = {
>  
>  extern int swiotlb_late_init_with_default_size(size_t default_size);
>  
> +static int __init atomic_pool_init(void)
> +{
> +	pgprot_t prot = __pgprot(PROT_NORMAL_NC);
> +	unsigned long nr_pages = atomic_pool_size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> +	struct page *page;
> +	void *addr;
> +
> +
> +	if (dev_get_cma_area(NULL))

Is it worth using this condition for other places where we check
IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_CMA) (maybe as a separate patch).

> +		page = dma_alloc_from_contiguous(NULL, nr_pages,
> +					get_order(atomic_pool_size));
> +	else
> +		page = alloc_pages(GFP_KERNEL, get_order(atomic_pool_size));

One problem here is that the atomic pool wouldn't be able to honour
GFP_DMA (in the latest kernel, CMA is by default in ZONE_DMA). You
should probably pass GFP_KERNEL|GFP_DMA here. You could also use the
swiotlb_alloc_coherent() which, with a NULL dev, assumes 32-bit DMA mask
but it still expects GFP_DMA to be passed.

> +	if (page) {
> +		int ret;
> +
> +		atomic_pool = gen_pool_create(PAGE_SHIFT, -1);
> +		if (!atomic_pool)
> +			goto free_page;
> +
> +		addr = dma_common_contiguous_remap(page, atomic_pool_size,
> +					VM_USERMAP, prot, atomic_pool_init);
> +
> +		if (!addr)
> +			goto destroy_genpool;
> +
> +		memset(addr, 0, atomic_pool_size);
> +		__dma_flush_range(addr, addr + atomic_pool_size);

If you add the flushing in the __dma_alloc_noncoherent(), it won't be
needed here (of course, more efficient here but it would not work if we
share the pool).

> +postcore_initcall(atomic_pool_init);

Why not arch_initcall? Or even better, we could have a common DMA init
function that calls swiotlb_late_init() and atomic_pool_init() (in this
order if you decide to use swiotlb allocation above).

-- 
Catalin

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Laura Abbott <lauraa@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
	David Riley <davidriley@chromium.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Ritesh Harjain <ritesh.harjani@gmail.com>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 5/5] arm64: Add atomic pool for non-coherent and CMA allocations.
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 14:43:43 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140718134343.GA4608@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1404324218-4743-6-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org>

On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 07:03:38PM +0100, Laura Abbott wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c b/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
> index 4164c5a..a2487f1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
[...]
>  static void *__dma_alloc_coherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>  				  dma_addr_t *dma_handle, gfp_t flags,
>  				  struct dma_attrs *attrs)
> @@ -53,7 +103,8 @@ static void *__dma_alloc_coherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>  	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ZONE_DMA) &&
>  	    dev->coherent_dma_mask <= DMA_BIT_MASK(32))
>  		flags |= GFP_DMA;
> -	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_CMA)) {
> +
> +	if (!(flags & __GFP_WAIT) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_CMA)) {
>  		struct page *page;
>  
>  		size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);

I think that's the wrong condition here. You want to use CMA if
(flags & __GFP_WAIT). CMA does not support atomic allocations so it can
fall back to swiotlb_alloc_coherent().

> @@ -73,50 +124,56 @@ static void __dma_free_coherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>  				void *vaddr, dma_addr_t dma_handle,
>  				struct dma_attrs *attrs)
>  {
> +	bool freed;
> +	phys_addr_t paddr = dma_to_phys(dev, dma_handle);
> +
>  	if (dev == NULL) {
>  		WARN_ONCE(1, "Use an actual device structure for DMA allocation\n");
>  		return;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_CMA)) {
> -		phys_addr_t paddr = dma_to_phys(dev, dma_handle);
>  
> -		dma_release_from_contiguous(dev,
> +	freed = dma_release_from_contiguous(dev,
>  					phys_to_page(paddr),
>  					size >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> -	} else {
> +	if (!freed)
>  		swiotlb_free_coherent(dev, size, vaddr, dma_handle);
> -	}
>  }

Is __dma_free_coherent() ever called in atomic context? If yes, the
dma_release_from_contiguous() may not like it since it tries to acquire
a mutex. But since we don't have the gfp flags here, we don't have an
easy way to know what to call.

So the initial idea of always calling __alloc_from_pool() for both
coherent/non-coherent cases would work better (but still with a single
shared pool, see below).

>  static void *__dma_alloc_noncoherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>  				     dma_addr_t *dma_handle, gfp_t flags,
>  				     struct dma_attrs *attrs)
>  {
> -	struct page *page, **map;
> +	struct page *page;
>  	void *ptr, *coherent_ptr;
> -	int order, i;
>  
>  	size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);
> -	order = get_order(size);
> +
> +	if (!(flags & __GFP_WAIT)) {
> +		struct page *page = NULL;
> +		void *addr = __alloc_from_pool(size, &page);
> +
> +		if (addr)
> +			*dma_handle = phys_to_dma(dev, page_to_phys(page));
> +
> +		return addr;
> +
> +	}

If we do the above for the __dma_alloc_coherent() case, we could use the
same pool but instead of returning addr it could just return
page_address(page). The downside of sharing the pool is that you need
cache flushing for every allocation (which we already do for the
non-atomic case).

> @@ -332,6 +391,67 @@ static struct notifier_block amba_bus_nb = {
>  
>  extern int swiotlb_late_init_with_default_size(size_t default_size);
>  
> +static int __init atomic_pool_init(void)
> +{
> +	pgprot_t prot = __pgprot(PROT_NORMAL_NC);
> +	unsigned long nr_pages = atomic_pool_size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> +	struct page *page;
> +	void *addr;
> +
> +
> +	if (dev_get_cma_area(NULL))

Is it worth using this condition for other places where we check
IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_CMA) (maybe as a separate patch).

> +		page = dma_alloc_from_contiguous(NULL, nr_pages,
> +					get_order(atomic_pool_size));
> +	else
> +		page = alloc_pages(GFP_KERNEL, get_order(atomic_pool_size));

One problem here is that the atomic pool wouldn't be able to honour
GFP_DMA (in the latest kernel, CMA is by default in ZONE_DMA). You
should probably pass GFP_KERNEL|GFP_DMA here. You could also use the
swiotlb_alloc_coherent() which, with a NULL dev, assumes 32-bit DMA mask
but it still expects GFP_DMA to be passed.

> +	if (page) {
> +		int ret;
> +
> +		atomic_pool = gen_pool_create(PAGE_SHIFT, -1);
> +		if (!atomic_pool)
> +			goto free_page;
> +
> +		addr = dma_common_contiguous_remap(page, atomic_pool_size,
> +					VM_USERMAP, prot, atomic_pool_init);
> +
> +		if (!addr)
> +			goto destroy_genpool;
> +
> +		memset(addr, 0, atomic_pool_size);
> +		__dma_flush_range(addr, addr + atomic_pool_size);

If you add the flushing in the __dma_alloc_noncoherent(), it won't be
needed here (of course, more efficient here but it would not work if we
share the pool).

> +postcore_initcall(atomic_pool_init);

Why not arch_initcall? Or even better, we could have a common DMA init
function that calls swiotlb_late_init() and atomic_pool_init() (in this
order if you decide to use swiotlb allocation above).

-- 
Catalin

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Laura Abbott <lauraa@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
	David Riley <davidriley@chromium.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Ritesh Harjain <ritesh.harjani@gmail.com>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 5/5] arm64: Add atomic pool for non-coherent and CMA allocations.
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 14:43:43 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140718134343.GA4608@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1404324218-4743-6-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org>

On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 07:03:38PM +0100, Laura Abbott wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c b/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
> index 4164c5a..a2487f1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/dma-mapping.c
[...]
>  static void *__dma_alloc_coherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>  				  dma_addr_t *dma_handle, gfp_t flags,
>  				  struct dma_attrs *attrs)
> @@ -53,7 +103,8 @@ static void *__dma_alloc_coherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>  	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ZONE_DMA) &&
>  	    dev->coherent_dma_mask <= DMA_BIT_MASK(32))
>  		flags |= GFP_DMA;
> -	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_CMA)) {
> +
> +	if (!(flags & __GFP_WAIT) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_CMA)) {
>  		struct page *page;
>  
>  		size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);

I think that's the wrong condition here. You want to use CMA if
(flags & __GFP_WAIT). CMA does not support atomic allocations so it can
fall back to swiotlb_alloc_coherent().

> @@ -73,50 +124,56 @@ static void __dma_free_coherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>  				void *vaddr, dma_addr_t dma_handle,
>  				struct dma_attrs *attrs)
>  {
> +	bool freed;
> +	phys_addr_t paddr = dma_to_phys(dev, dma_handle);
> +
>  	if (dev == NULL) {
>  		WARN_ONCE(1, "Use an actual device structure for DMA allocation\n");
>  		return;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_CMA)) {
> -		phys_addr_t paddr = dma_to_phys(dev, dma_handle);
>  
> -		dma_release_from_contiguous(dev,
> +	freed = dma_release_from_contiguous(dev,
>  					phys_to_page(paddr),
>  					size >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> -	} else {
> +	if (!freed)
>  		swiotlb_free_coherent(dev, size, vaddr, dma_handle);
> -	}
>  }

Is __dma_free_coherent() ever called in atomic context? If yes, the
dma_release_from_contiguous() may not like it since it tries to acquire
a mutex. But since we don't have the gfp flags here, we don't have an
easy way to know what to call.

So the initial idea of always calling __alloc_from_pool() for both
coherent/non-coherent cases would work better (but still with a single
shared pool, see below).

>  static void *__dma_alloc_noncoherent(struct device *dev, size_t size,
>  				     dma_addr_t *dma_handle, gfp_t flags,
>  				     struct dma_attrs *attrs)
>  {
> -	struct page *page, **map;
> +	struct page *page;
>  	void *ptr, *coherent_ptr;
> -	int order, i;
>  
>  	size = PAGE_ALIGN(size);
> -	order = get_order(size);
> +
> +	if (!(flags & __GFP_WAIT)) {
> +		struct page *page = NULL;
> +		void *addr = __alloc_from_pool(size, &page);
> +
> +		if (addr)
> +			*dma_handle = phys_to_dma(dev, page_to_phys(page));
> +
> +		return addr;
> +
> +	}

If we do the above for the __dma_alloc_coherent() case, we could use the
same pool but instead of returning addr it could just return
page_address(page). The downside of sharing the pool is that you need
cache flushing for every allocation (which we already do for the
non-atomic case).

> @@ -332,6 +391,67 @@ static struct notifier_block amba_bus_nb = {
>  
>  extern int swiotlb_late_init_with_default_size(size_t default_size);
>  
> +static int __init atomic_pool_init(void)
> +{
> +	pgprot_t prot = __pgprot(PROT_NORMAL_NC);
> +	unsigned long nr_pages = atomic_pool_size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> +	struct page *page;
> +	void *addr;
> +
> +
> +	if (dev_get_cma_area(NULL))

Is it worth using this condition for other places where we check
IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DMA_CMA) (maybe as a separate patch).

> +		page = dma_alloc_from_contiguous(NULL, nr_pages,
> +					get_order(atomic_pool_size));
> +	else
> +		page = alloc_pages(GFP_KERNEL, get_order(atomic_pool_size));

One problem here is that the atomic pool wouldn't be able to honour
GFP_DMA (in the latest kernel, CMA is by default in ZONE_DMA). You
should probably pass GFP_KERNEL|GFP_DMA here. You could also use the
swiotlb_alloc_coherent() which, with a NULL dev, assumes 32-bit DMA mask
but it still expects GFP_DMA to be passed.

> +	if (page) {
> +		int ret;
> +
> +		atomic_pool = gen_pool_create(PAGE_SHIFT, -1);
> +		if (!atomic_pool)
> +			goto free_page;
> +
> +		addr = dma_common_contiguous_remap(page, atomic_pool_size,
> +					VM_USERMAP, prot, atomic_pool_init);
> +
> +		if (!addr)
> +			goto destroy_genpool;
> +
> +		memset(addr, 0, atomic_pool_size);
> +		__dma_flush_range(addr, addr + atomic_pool_size);

If you add the flushing in the __dma_alloc_noncoherent(), it won't be
needed here (of course, more efficient here but it would not work if we
share the pool).

> +postcore_initcall(atomic_pool_init);

Why not arch_initcall? Or even better, we could have a common DMA init
function that calls swiotlb_late_init() and atomic_pool_init() (in this
order if you decide to use swiotlb allocation above).

-- 
Catalin

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-07-18 13:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 85+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-02 18:03 [PATCHv4 0/5] DMA Atomic pool for arm64 Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03 ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03 ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03 ` [PATCHv4 1/5] lib/genalloc.c: Add power aligned algorithm Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03   ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03   ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-03 18:10   ` Will Deacon
2014-07-03 18:10     ` Will Deacon
2014-07-03 18:10     ` Will Deacon
2014-07-09 22:35     ` Olof Johansson
2014-07-09 22:35       ` Olof Johansson
2014-07-09 22:35       ` Olof Johansson
2014-07-02 18:03 ` [PATCHv4 2/5] lib/genalloc.c: Add genpool range check function Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03   ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03   ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-03 18:14   ` Will Deacon
2014-07-03 18:14     ` Will Deacon
2014-07-03 18:14     ` Will Deacon
2014-07-09 22:33   ` Olof Johansson
2014-07-09 22:33     ` Olof Johansson
2014-07-09 22:33     ` Olof Johansson
2014-07-21 19:51     ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-21 19:51       ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-21 19:51       ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-22 15:50       ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-22 15:50         ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-22 15:50         ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-02 18:03 ` [PATCHv4 3/5] common: dma-mapping: Introduce common remapping functions Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03   ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03   ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-09 22:46   ` Olof Johansson
2014-07-09 22:46     ` Olof Johansson
2014-07-09 22:46     ` Olof Johansson
2014-07-18 14:13     ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-18 14:13       ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-18 14:13       ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-18 13:53   ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-18 13:53     ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-18 13:53     ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-21 19:33     ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-21 19:33       ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-21 19:33       ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-22 16:04       ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-22 16:04         ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-22 16:04         ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-02 18:03 ` [PATCHv4 4/5] arm: use genalloc for the atomic pool Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03   ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03   ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-04 13:42   ` Thierry Reding
2014-07-04 13:42     ` Thierry Reding
2014-07-21 21:22     ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-21 21:22       ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-21 21:22       ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03 ` [PATCHv4 5/5] arm64: Add atomic pool for non-coherent and CMA allocations Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03   ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-02 18:03   ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-04 13:35   ` Thierry Reding
2014-07-04 13:35     ` Thierry Reding
2014-07-21 22:00     ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-21 22:00       ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-21 22:00       ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-18 13:43   ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2014-07-18 13:43     ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-18 13:43     ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-21 22:36     ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-21 22:36       ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-21 22:36       ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-22 15:56       ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-22 15:56         ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-22 15:56         ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-22 18:06   ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-07-22 18:06     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-07-22 18:06     ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-07-22 21:03     ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-22 21:03       ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-22 21:03       ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-22 23:51       ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-22 23:51         ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-22 23:51         ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-23 11:12       ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-07-23 11:12         ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-07-23 11:12         ` Arnd Bergmann
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-07-23  1:35 [PATCHv4 0/5] Atomic pool for arm64 Laura Abbott
2014-07-23  1:35 ` [PATCHv4 5/5] arm64: Add atomic pool for non-coherent and CMA allocations Laura Abbott
2014-07-23  1:35   ` Laura Abbott
2014-07-23  1:35   ` Laura Abbott

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=20140718134343.GA4608@arm.com \
    --to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.