From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 7/8] mm/memory_hotplug: Make unregister_memory_block_under_nodes() never fail
Date: Tue, 07 May 2019 18:38:03 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190507183804.5512-8-david@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190507183804.5512-1-david@redhat.com>
We really don't want anything during memory hotunplug to fail.
We always pass a valid memory block device, that check can go. Avoid
allocating memory and eventually failing. As we are always called under
lock, we can use a static piece of memory. This avoids having to put
the structure onto the stack, having to guess about the stack size
of callers.
Patch inspired by a patch from Oscar Salvador.
In the future, there might be no need to iterate over nodes at all.
mem->nid should tell us exactly what to remove. Memory block devices
with mixed nodes (added during boot) should properly fenced off and never
removed.
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
---
drivers/base/node.c | 18 +++++-------------
include/linux/node.h | 5 ++---
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
index 04fdfa99b8bc..9be88fd05147 100644
--- a/drivers/base/node.c
+++ b/drivers/base/node.c
@@ -803,20 +803,14 @@ int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk, void *arg)
/*
* Unregister memory block device under all nodes that it spans.
+ * Has to be called with mem_sysfs_mutex held (due to unlinked_nodes).
*/
-int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
+void unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
{
- NODEMASK_ALLOC(nodemask_t, unlinked_nodes, GFP_KERNEL);
unsigned long pfn, sect_start_pfn, sect_end_pfn;
+ static nodemask_t unlinked_nodes;
- if (!mem_blk) {
- NODEMASK_FREE(unlinked_nodes);
- return -EFAULT;
- }
- if (!unlinked_nodes)
- return -ENOMEM;
- nodes_clear(*unlinked_nodes);
-
+ nodes_clear(unlinked_nodes);
sect_start_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(mem_blk->start_section_nr);
sect_end_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(mem_blk->end_section_nr);
for (pfn = sect_start_pfn; pfn <= sect_end_pfn; pfn++) {
@@ -827,15 +821,13 @@ int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
continue;
if (!node_online(nid))
continue;
- if (node_test_and_set(nid, *unlinked_nodes))
+ if (node_test_and_set(nid, unlinked_nodes))
continue;
sysfs_remove_link(&node_devices[nid]->dev.kobj,
kobject_name(&mem_blk->dev.kobj));
sysfs_remove_link(&mem_blk->dev.kobj,
kobject_name(&node_devices[nid]->dev.kobj));
}
- NODEMASK_FREE(unlinked_nodes);
- return 0;
}
int link_mem_sections(int nid, unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
diff --git a/include/linux/node.h b/include/linux/node.h
index 02a29e71b175..548c226966a2 100644
--- a/include/linux/node.h
+++ b/include/linux/node.h
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ extern int register_cpu_under_node(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int nid);
extern int unregister_cpu_under_node(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int nid);
extern int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk,
void *arg);
-extern int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk);
+extern void unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk);
extern int register_memory_node_under_compute_node(unsigned int mem_nid,
unsigned int cpu_nid,
@@ -175,9 +175,8 @@ static inline int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk,
{
return 0;
}
-static inline int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
+static inline void unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
{
- return 0;
}
static inline void register_hugetlbfs_with_node(node_registration_func_t reg,
--
2.20.1
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 7/8] mm/memory_hotplug: Make unregister_memory_block_under_nodes() never fail
Date: Tue, 7 May 2019 20:38:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190507183804.5512-8-david@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190507183804.5512-1-david@redhat.com>
We really don't want anything during memory hotunplug to fail.
We always pass a valid memory block device, that check can go. Avoid
allocating memory and eventually failing. As we are always called under
lock, we can use a static piece of memory. This avoids having to put
the structure onto the stack, having to guess about the stack size
of callers.
Patch inspired by a patch from Oscar Salvador.
In the future, there might be no need to iterate over nodes at all.
mem->nid should tell us exactly what to remove. Memory block devices
with mixed nodes (added during boot) should properly fenced off and never
removed.
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
---
drivers/base/node.c | 18 +++++-------------
include/linux/node.h | 5 ++---
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
index 04fdfa99b8bc..9be88fd05147 100644
--- a/drivers/base/node.c
+++ b/drivers/base/node.c
@@ -803,20 +803,14 @@ int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk, void *arg)
/*
* Unregister memory block device under all nodes that it spans.
+ * Has to be called with mem_sysfs_mutex held (due to unlinked_nodes).
*/
-int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
+void unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
{
- NODEMASK_ALLOC(nodemask_t, unlinked_nodes, GFP_KERNEL);
unsigned long pfn, sect_start_pfn, sect_end_pfn;
+ static nodemask_t unlinked_nodes;
- if (!mem_blk) {
- NODEMASK_FREE(unlinked_nodes);
- return -EFAULT;
- }
- if (!unlinked_nodes)
- return -ENOMEM;
- nodes_clear(*unlinked_nodes);
-
+ nodes_clear(unlinked_nodes);
sect_start_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(mem_blk->start_section_nr);
sect_end_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(mem_blk->end_section_nr);
for (pfn = sect_start_pfn; pfn <= sect_end_pfn; pfn++) {
@@ -827,15 +821,13 @@ int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
continue;
if (!node_online(nid))
continue;
- if (node_test_and_set(nid, *unlinked_nodes))
+ if (node_test_and_set(nid, unlinked_nodes))
continue;
sysfs_remove_link(&node_devices[nid]->dev.kobj,
kobject_name(&mem_blk->dev.kobj));
sysfs_remove_link(&mem_blk->dev.kobj,
kobject_name(&node_devices[nid]->dev.kobj));
}
- NODEMASK_FREE(unlinked_nodes);
- return 0;
}
int link_mem_sections(int nid, unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
diff --git a/include/linux/node.h b/include/linux/node.h
index 02a29e71b175..548c226966a2 100644
--- a/include/linux/node.h
+++ b/include/linux/node.h
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ extern int register_cpu_under_node(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int nid);
extern int unregister_cpu_under_node(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int nid);
extern int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk,
void *arg);
-extern int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk);
+extern void unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk);
extern int register_memory_node_under_compute_node(unsigned int mem_nid,
unsigned int cpu_nid,
@@ -175,9 +175,8 @@ static inline int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk,
{
return 0;
}
-static inline int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
+static inline void unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
{
- return 0;
}
static inline void register_hugetlbfs_with_node(node_registration_func_t reg,
--
2.20.1
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org,
Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Subject: [PATCH v2 7/8] mm/memory_hotplug: Make unregister_memory_block_under_nodes() never fail
Date: Tue, 7 May 2019 20:38:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190507183804.5512-8-david@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190507183804.5512-1-david@redhat.com>
We really don't want anything during memory hotunplug to fail.
We always pass a valid memory block device, that check can go. Avoid
allocating memory and eventually failing. As we are always called under
lock, we can use a static piece of memory. This avoids having to put
the structure onto the stack, having to guess about the stack size
of callers.
Patch inspired by a patch from Oscar Salvador.
In the future, there might be no need to iterate over nodes at all.
mem->nid should tell us exactly what to remove. Memory block devices
with mixed nodes (added during boot) should properly fenced off and never
removed.
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
---
drivers/base/node.c | 18 +++++-------------
include/linux/node.h | 5 ++---
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
index 04fdfa99b8bc..9be88fd05147 100644
--- a/drivers/base/node.c
+++ b/drivers/base/node.c
@@ -803,20 +803,14 @@ int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk, void *arg)
/*
* Unregister memory block device under all nodes that it spans.
+ * Has to be called with mem_sysfs_mutex held (due to unlinked_nodes).
*/
-int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
+void unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
{
- NODEMASK_ALLOC(nodemask_t, unlinked_nodes, GFP_KERNEL);
unsigned long pfn, sect_start_pfn, sect_end_pfn;
+ static nodemask_t unlinked_nodes;
- if (!mem_blk) {
- NODEMASK_FREE(unlinked_nodes);
- return -EFAULT;
- }
- if (!unlinked_nodes)
- return -ENOMEM;
- nodes_clear(*unlinked_nodes);
-
+ nodes_clear(unlinked_nodes);
sect_start_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(mem_blk->start_section_nr);
sect_end_pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(mem_blk->end_section_nr);
for (pfn = sect_start_pfn; pfn <= sect_end_pfn; pfn++) {
@@ -827,15 +821,13 @@ int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
continue;
if (!node_online(nid))
continue;
- if (node_test_and_set(nid, *unlinked_nodes))
+ if (node_test_and_set(nid, unlinked_nodes))
continue;
sysfs_remove_link(&node_devices[nid]->dev.kobj,
kobject_name(&mem_blk->dev.kobj));
sysfs_remove_link(&mem_blk->dev.kobj,
kobject_name(&node_devices[nid]->dev.kobj));
}
- NODEMASK_FREE(unlinked_nodes);
- return 0;
}
int link_mem_sections(int nid, unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
diff --git a/include/linux/node.h b/include/linux/node.h
index 02a29e71b175..548c226966a2 100644
--- a/include/linux/node.h
+++ b/include/linux/node.h
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ extern int register_cpu_under_node(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int nid);
extern int unregister_cpu_under_node(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int nid);
extern int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk,
void *arg);
-extern int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk);
+extern void unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk);
extern int register_memory_node_under_compute_node(unsigned int mem_nid,
unsigned int cpu_nid,
@@ -175,9 +175,8 @@ static inline int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk,
{
return 0;
}
-static inline int unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
+static inline void unregister_memory_block_under_nodes(struct memory_block *mem_blk)
{
- return 0;
}
static inline void register_hugetlbfs_with_node(node_registration_func_t reg,
--
2.20.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-07 18:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 125+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-07 18:37 [PATCH v2 0/8] mm/memory_hotplug: Factor out memory block device handling David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:37 ` [PATCH v2 1/8] mm/memory_hotplug: Simplify and fix check_hotplug_memory_range() David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 20:38 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 20:38 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 20:38 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-09 12:23 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 12:23 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 12:23 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-07 18:37 ` [PATCH v2 2/8] s390x/mm: Implement arch_remove_memory() David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 20:46 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 20:46 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 20:46 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 20:47 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 20:47 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 20:47 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 20:57 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 20:57 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 20:57 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 21:13 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 21:13 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 21:13 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:37 ` [PATCH v2 3/8] mm/memory_hotplug: arch_remove_memory() and __remove_pages() with CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 21:02 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 21:02 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 21:06 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 21:06 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-13 7:48 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-13 7:48 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-13 8:20 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-13 8:20 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:38 ` [PATCH v2 4/8] mm/memory_hotplug: Create memory block devices after arch_add_memory() David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 21:17 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 21:17 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 21:17 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 21:27 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 21:27 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 21:27 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-08 8:35 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-08 8:35 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-08 8:35 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 12:43 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 12:43 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 12:43 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 12:50 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 12:50 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 12:50 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 13:55 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 13:55 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 13:55 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 14:05 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 14:05 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 14:05 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 14:31 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 14:31 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 14:31 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 14:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 14:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 14:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 21:50 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 21:50 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 21:50 ` Wei Yang
2019-05-09 22:18 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 22:18 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 22:18 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:38 ` [PATCH v2 5/8] mm/memory_hotplug: Drop MHP_MEMBLOCK_API David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 21:19 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 21:19 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 21:19 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 21:24 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 21:24 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 21:24 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 21:25 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 21:25 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 21:25 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-08 7:39 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-08 7:39 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-08 7:39 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-08 23:08 ` osalvador
2019-05-08 23:08 ` osalvador
2019-05-08 23:08 ` osalvador
2019-05-09 7:05 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 7:05 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-09 7:05 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:38 ` [PATCH v2 6/8] mm/memory_hotplug: Remove memory block devices before arch_remove_memory() David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 21:27 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 21:27 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 21:27 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 18:38 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2019-05-07 18:38 ` [PATCH v2 7/8] mm/memory_hotplug: Make unregister_memory_block_under_nodes() never fail David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-08 0:15 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-08 0:15 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-08 0:15 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-08 7:21 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-08 7:21 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-08 7:21 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-08 13:50 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-08 13:50 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-08 13:50 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 18:38 ` [PATCH v2 8/8] mm/memory_hotplug: Remove "zone" parameter from sparse_remove_one_section David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 18:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-08 0:30 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-08 0:30 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-08 0:30 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 19:04 ` [PATCH v2 0/8] mm/memory_hotplug: Factor out memory block device handling Dan Williams
2019-05-07 19:04 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 19:21 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 19:21 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 19:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 19:37 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-07 20:36 ` Dan Williams
2019-05-07 20:36 ` Dan Williams
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=20190507183804.5512-8-david@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alexander.deucher@amd.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=rafael@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.