All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
To: x86@kernel.org
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	Mike Anderson <andmike@linux.ibm.com>,
	Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
	Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Thomas Lendacky <Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] DMA mapping: Move SME handling to x86-specific files
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 01:45:53 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190713044554.28719-3-bauerman@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190713044554.28719-1-bauerman@linux.ibm.com>

Secure Memory Encryption is an x86-specific feature, so it shouldn't appear
in generic kernel code.

In DMA mapping code, Christoph Hellwig mentioned that "There is no reason
why we should have a special debug printk just for one specific reason why
there is a requirement for a large DMA mask.", so we just remove
dma_check_mask().

In SWIOTLB code, there's no need to mention which memory encryption feature
is active, so just use a more generic warning. Besides, other architectures
will have different names for similar technology.

Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
---
 arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h |  4 +---
 arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h  | 10 ++++++++++
 include/linux/mem_encrypt.h         | 14 +-------------
 kernel/dma/mapping.c                |  8 --------
 kernel/dma/swiotlb.c                |  3 +--
 5 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
index 3eb018508190..ff813a56bc30 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -4,9 +4,7 @@
 
 #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
 
-#define sme_me_mask	0ULL
-
-static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; }
+static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void) { return false; }
 extern bool sev_active(void);
 
 int set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages);
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
index 0c196c47d621..848ce43b9040 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -92,6 +92,16 @@ early_set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long vaddr, unsigned long size) { return 0;
 
 extern char __start_bss_decrypted[], __end_bss_decrypted[], __start_bss_decrypted_unused[];
 
+static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void)
+{
+	return sme_me_mask;
+}
+
+static inline u64 sme_get_me_mask(void)
+{
+	return sme_me_mask;
+}
+
 #endif	/* __ASSEMBLY__ */
 
 #endif	/* __X86_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ */
diff --git a/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h b/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
index 470bd53a89df..0c5b0ff9eb29 100644
--- a/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -18,23 +18,11 @@
 
 #else	/* !CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_MEM_ENCRYPT */
 
-#define sme_me_mask	0ULL
-
-static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; }
+static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void) { return false; }
 static inline bool sev_active(void) { return false; }
 
 #endif	/* CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_MEM_ENCRYPT */
 
-static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void)
-{
-	return sme_me_mask;
-}
-
-static inline u64 sme_get_me_mask(void)
-{
-	return sme_me_mask;
-}
-
 #ifdef CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT
 /*
  * The __sme_set() and __sme_clr() macros are useful for adding or removing
diff --git a/kernel/dma/mapping.c b/kernel/dma/mapping.c
index f7afdadb6770..b53fc7ec4914 100644
--- a/kernel/dma/mapping.c
+++ b/kernel/dma/mapping.c
@@ -291,12 +291,6 @@ void dma_free_attrs(struct device *dev, size_t size, void *cpu_addr,
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_free_attrs);
 
-static inline void dma_check_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
-{
-	if (sme_active() && (mask < (((u64)sme_get_me_mask() << 1) - 1)))
-		dev_warn(dev, "SME is active, device will require DMA bounce buffers\n");
-}
-
 int dma_supported(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
 {
 	const struct dma_map_ops *ops = get_dma_ops(dev);
@@ -321,7 +315,6 @@ int dma_set_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
 		return -EIO;
 
 	arch_dma_set_mask(dev, mask);
-	dma_check_mask(dev, mask);
 	*dev->dma_mask = mask;
 	return 0;
 }
@@ -333,7 +326,6 @@ int dma_set_coherent_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
 	if (!dma_supported(dev, mask))
 		return -EIO;
 
-	dma_check_mask(dev, mask);
 	dev->coherent_dma_mask = mask;
 	return 0;
 }
diff --git a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
index 62fa5a82a065..e52401f94e91 100644
--- a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
+++ b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
@@ -459,8 +459,7 @@ phys_addr_t swiotlb_tbl_map_single(struct device *hwdev,
 		panic("Can not allocate SWIOTLB buffer earlier and can't now provide you with the DMA bounce buffer");
 
 	if (mem_encrypt_active())
-		pr_warn_once("%s is active and system is using DMA bounce buffers\n",
-			     sme_active() ? "SME" : "SEV");
+		pr_warn_once("Memory encryption is active and system is using DMA bounce buffers\n");
 
 	mask = dma_get_seg_boundary(hwdev);
 
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
To: x86@kernel.org
Cc: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
	Thomas Lendacky <Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com>,
	Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
	Mike Anderson <andmike@linux.ibm.com>,
	Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>,
	Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] DMA mapping: Move SME handling to x86-specific files
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 01:45:53 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190713044554.28719-3-bauerman@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190713044554.28719-1-bauerman@linux.ibm.com>

Secure Memory Encryption is an x86-specific feature, so it shouldn't appear
in generic kernel code.

In DMA mapping code, Christoph Hellwig mentioned that "There is no reason
why we should have a special debug printk just for one specific reason why
there is a requirement for a large DMA mask.", so we just remove
dma_check_mask().

In SWIOTLB code, there's no need to mention which memory encryption feature
is active, so just use a more generic warning. Besides, other architectures
will have different names for similar technology.

Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
---
 arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h |  4 +---
 arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h  | 10 ++++++++++
 include/linux/mem_encrypt.h         | 14 +-------------
 kernel/dma/mapping.c                |  8 --------
 kernel/dma/swiotlb.c                |  3 +--
 5 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
index 3eb018508190..ff813a56bc30 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -4,9 +4,7 @@
 
 #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
 
-#define sme_me_mask	0ULL
-
-static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; }
+static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void) { return false; }
 extern bool sev_active(void);
 
 int set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages);
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
index 0c196c47d621..848ce43b9040 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -92,6 +92,16 @@ early_set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long vaddr, unsigned long size) { return 0;
 
 extern char __start_bss_decrypted[], __end_bss_decrypted[], __start_bss_decrypted_unused[];
 
+static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void)
+{
+	return sme_me_mask;
+}
+
+static inline u64 sme_get_me_mask(void)
+{
+	return sme_me_mask;
+}
+
 #endif	/* __ASSEMBLY__ */
 
 #endif	/* __X86_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ */
diff --git a/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h b/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
index 470bd53a89df..0c5b0ff9eb29 100644
--- a/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -18,23 +18,11 @@
 
 #else	/* !CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_MEM_ENCRYPT */
 
-#define sme_me_mask	0ULL
-
-static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; }
+static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void) { return false; }
 static inline bool sev_active(void) { return false; }
 
 #endif	/* CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_MEM_ENCRYPT */
 
-static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void)
-{
-	return sme_me_mask;
-}
-
-static inline u64 sme_get_me_mask(void)
-{
-	return sme_me_mask;
-}
-
 #ifdef CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT
 /*
  * The __sme_set() and __sme_clr() macros are useful for adding or removing
diff --git a/kernel/dma/mapping.c b/kernel/dma/mapping.c
index f7afdadb6770..b53fc7ec4914 100644
--- a/kernel/dma/mapping.c
+++ b/kernel/dma/mapping.c
@@ -291,12 +291,6 @@ void dma_free_attrs(struct device *dev, size_t size, void *cpu_addr,
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_free_attrs);
 
-static inline void dma_check_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
-{
-	if (sme_active() && (mask < (((u64)sme_get_me_mask() << 1) - 1)))
-		dev_warn(dev, "SME is active, device will require DMA bounce buffers\n");
-}
-
 int dma_supported(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
 {
 	const struct dma_map_ops *ops = get_dma_ops(dev);
@@ -321,7 +315,6 @@ int dma_set_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
 		return -EIO;
 
 	arch_dma_set_mask(dev, mask);
-	dma_check_mask(dev, mask);
 	*dev->dma_mask = mask;
 	return 0;
 }
@@ -333,7 +326,6 @@ int dma_set_coherent_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
 	if (!dma_supported(dev, mask))
 		return -EIO;
 
-	dma_check_mask(dev, mask);
 	dev->coherent_dma_mask = mask;
 	return 0;
 }
diff --git a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
index 62fa5a82a065..e52401f94e91 100644
--- a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
+++ b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
@@ -459,8 +459,7 @@ phys_addr_t swiotlb_tbl_map_single(struct device *hwdev,
 		panic("Can not allocate SWIOTLB buffer earlier and can't now provide you with the DMA bounce buffer");
 
 	if (mem_encrypt_active())
-		pr_warn_once("%s is active and system is using DMA bounce buffers\n",
-			     sme_active() ? "SME" : "SEV");
+		pr_warn_once("Memory encryption is active and system is using DMA bounce buffers\n");
 
 	mask = dma_get_seg_boundary(hwdev);
 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
To: x86@kernel.org
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
	Mike Anderson <andmike@linux.ibm.com>,
	Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
	Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Thomas Lendacky <Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] DMA mapping: Move SME handling to x86-specific files
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 01:45:53 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190713044554.28719-3-bauerman@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190713044554.28719-1-bauerman@linux.ibm.com>

Secure Memory Encryption is an x86-specific feature, so it shouldn't appear
in generic kernel code.

In DMA mapping code, Christoph Hellwig mentioned that "There is no reason
why we should have a special debug printk just for one specific reason why
there is a requirement for a large DMA mask.", so we just remove
dma_check_mask().

In SWIOTLB code, there's no need to mention which memory encryption feature
is active, so just use a more generic warning. Besides, other architectures
will have different names for similar technology.

Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>
---
 arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h |  4 +---
 arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h  | 10 ++++++++++
 include/linux/mem_encrypt.h         | 14 +-------------
 kernel/dma/mapping.c                |  8 --------
 kernel/dma/swiotlb.c                |  3 +--
 5 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
index 3eb018508190..ff813a56bc30 100644
--- a/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -4,9 +4,7 @@
 
 #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
 
-#define sme_me_mask	0ULL
-
-static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; }
+static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void) { return false; }
 extern bool sev_active(void);
 
 int set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages);
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
index 0c196c47d621..848ce43b9040 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -92,6 +92,16 @@ early_set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long vaddr, unsigned long size) { return 0;
 
 extern char __start_bss_decrypted[], __end_bss_decrypted[], __start_bss_decrypted_unused[];
 
+static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void)
+{
+	return sme_me_mask;
+}
+
+static inline u64 sme_get_me_mask(void)
+{
+	return sme_me_mask;
+}
+
 #endif	/* __ASSEMBLY__ */
 
 #endif	/* __X86_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ */
diff --git a/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h b/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
index 470bd53a89df..0c5b0ff9eb29 100644
--- a/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
+++ b/include/linux/mem_encrypt.h
@@ -18,23 +18,11 @@
 
 #else	/* !CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_MEM_ENCRYPT */
 
-#define sme_me_mask	0ULL
-
-static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; }
+static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void) { return false; }
 static inline bool sev_active(void) { return false; }
 
 #endif	/* CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_MEM_ENCRYPT */
 
-static inline bool mem_encrypt_active(void)
-{
-	return sme_me_mask;
-}
-
-static inline u64 sme_get_me_mask(void)
-{
-	return sme_me_mask;
-}
-
 #ifdef CONFIG_AMD_MEM_ENCRYPT
 /*
  * The __sme_set() and __sme_clr() macros are useful for adding or removing
diff --git a/kernel/dma/mapping.c b/kernel/dma/mapping.c
index f7afdadb6770..b53fc7ec4914 100644
--- a/kernel/dma/mapping.c
+++ b/kernel/dma/mapping.c
@@ -291,12 +291,6 @@ void dma_free_attrs(struct device *dev, size_t size, void *cpu_addr,
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(dma_free_attrs);
 
-static inline void dma_check_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
-{
-	if (sme_active() && (mask < (((u64)sme_get_me_mask() << 1) - 1)))
-		dev_warn(dev, "SME is active, device will require DMA bounce buffers\n");
-}
-
 int dma_supported(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
 {
 	const struct dma_map_ops *ops = get_dma_ops(dev);
@@ -321,7 +315,6 @@ int dma_set_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
 		return -EIO;
 
 	arch_dma_set_mask(dev, mask);
-	dma_check_mask(dev, mask);
 	*dev->dma_mask = mask;
 	return 0;
 }
@@ -333,7 +326,6 @@ int dma_set_coherent_mask(struct device *dev, u64 mask)
 	if (!dma_supported(dev, mask))
 		return -EIO;
 
-	dma_check_mask(dev, mask);
 	dev->coherent_dma_mask = mask;
 	return 0;
 }
diff --git a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
index 62fa5a82a065..e52401f94e91 100644
--- a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
+++ b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
@@ -459,8 +459,7 @@ phys_addr_t swiotlb_tbl_map_single(struct device *hwdev,
 		panic("Can not allocate SWIOTLB buffer earlier and can't now provide you with the DMA bounce buffer");
 
 	if (mem_encrypt_active())
-		pr_warn_once("%s is active and system is using DMA bounce buffers\n",
-			     sme_active() ? "SME" : "SEV");
+		pr_warn_once("Memory encryption is active and system is using DMA bounce buffers\n");
 
 	mask = dma_get_seg_boundary(hwdev);
 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-07-13  4:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-13  4:45 [PATCH 0/3] Remove x86-specific code from generic headers Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  4:45 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  4:45 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  4:45 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86, s390: Move ARCH_HAS_MEM_ENCRYPT definition to arch/Kconfig Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  4:45   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  4:45   ` [PATCH 1/3] x86,s390: " Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  7:27   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-13  7:27     ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-13  7:27     ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-15 15:23   ` [PATCH 1/3] x86, s390: " janani
2019-07-15 15:23     ` janani
2019-07-15 15:23     ` janani
2019-07-15 20:00     ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-15 20:00       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-15 20:00       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  4:45 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann [this message]
2019-07-13  4:45   ` [PATCH 2/3] DMA mapping: Move SME handling to x86-specific files Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  4:45   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  7:29   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-13  7:29     ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-13  7:29     ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-13  4:45 ` [PATCH 3/3] fs/core/vmcore: Move sev_active() reference to x86 arch code Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  4:45   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  4:45   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  5:08 ` [PATCH 0/3] Remove x86-specific code from generic headers Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  5:08   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-13  5:08   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-07-12  5:36 Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-12  5:36 ` [PATCH 2/3] DMA mapping: Move SME handling to x86-specific files Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-12  5:36   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-12  5:36   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-12  7:13   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-12  7:13     ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-12  7:13     ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-07-12 23:42     ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-12 23:42       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-12 23:42       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-12 23:42       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-12 16:09   ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-07-12 16:09     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-07-12 16:09     ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-07-18 19:47     ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-18 19:47       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-18 19:47       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-19  9:05   ` kbuild test robot
2019-07-19  9:05     ` kbuild test robot
2019-07-19  9:05     ` kbuild test robot
2019-07-20  0:22     ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-20  0:22       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2019-07-20  0:22       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann

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=20190713044554.28719-3-bauerman@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=bauerman@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=Thomas.Lendacky@amd.com \
    --cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
    --cc=andmike@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@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.