From: Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.ibm.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, paulus@au1.ibm.com,
aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jglisse@redhat.com,
linuxram@us.ibm.com, sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
cclaudio@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/7] kvmppc: Driver to manage pages of secure guest
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 03:54:59 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190830034259.GD31913@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190829083810.GA13039@lst.de>
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 10:38:10AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 03:56:14PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Bits 60:56 in the rmap entry will be used to identify the
> > + * different uses/functions of rmap.
> > + */
> > +#define KVMPPC_RMAP_DEVM_PFN (0x2ULL << 56)
>
> How did you come up with this specific value?
Different usage types of RMAP array are being defined.
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1149791/
The above value is reserved for device pfn usage.
>
> > +
> > +static inline bool kvmppc_rmap_is_devm_pfn(unsigned long pfn)
> > +{
> > + return !!(pfn & KVMPPC_RMAP_DEVM_PFN);
> > +}
>
> No need for !! when returning a bool. Also the helper seems a little
> pointless, just opencoding it would make the code more readable in my
> opinion.
I expect similar routines for other usages of RMAP to come up.
>
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_UV
> > +extern int kvmppc_devm_init(void);
> > +extern void kvmppc_devm_free(void);
>
> There is no need for extern in a function declaration.
>
> > +static int
> > +kvmppc_devm_migrate_alloc_and_copy(struct migrate_vma *mig,
> > + unsigned long *rmap, unsigned long gpa,
> > + unsigned int lpid, unsigned long page_shift)
> > +{
> > + struct page *spage = migrate_pfn_to_page(*mig->src);
> > + unsigned long pfn = *mig->src >> MIGRATE_PFN_SHIFT;
> > + struct page *dpage;
> > +
> > + *mig->dst = 0;
> > + if (!spage || !(*mig->src & MIGRATE_PFN_MIGRATE))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + dpage = kvmppc_devm_get_page(rmap, gpa, lpid);
> > + if (!dpage)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + if (spage)
> > + uv_page_in(lpid, pfn << page_shift, gpa, 0, page_shift);
> > +
> > + *mig->dst = migrate_pfn(page_to_pfn(dpage)) | MIGRATE_PFN_LOCKED;
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> I think you can just merge this trivial helper into the only caller.
Yes I can, but felt it is nicely abstracted out to a function right now.
>
> > +static int
> > +kvmppc_devm_fault_migrate_alloc_and_copy(struct migrate_vma *mig,
> > + unsigned long page_shift)
> > +{
> > + struct page *dpage, *spage;
> > + struct kvmppc_devm_page_pvt *pvt;
> > + unsigned long pfn;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + spage = migrate_pfn_to_page(*mig->src);
> > + if (!spage || !(*mig->src & MIGRATE_PFN_MIGRATE))
> > + return 0;
> > + if (!is_zone_device_page(spage))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + dpage = alloc_page_vma(GFP_HIGHUSER, mig->vma, mig->start);
> > + if (!dpage)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + lock_page(dpage);
> > + pvt = spage->zone_device_data;
> > +
> > + pfn = page_to_pfn(dpage);
> > + ret = uv_page_out(pvt->lpid, pfn << page_shift, pvt->gpa, 0,
> > + page_shift);
> > + if (ret = U_SUCCESS)
> > + *mig->dst = migrate_pfn(pfn) | MIGRATE_PFN_LOCKED;
> > + else {
> > + unlock_page(dpage);
> > + __free_page(dpage);
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
>
> Here we actually have two callers, but they have a fair amount of
> duplicate code in them. I think you want to move that common
> code (including setting up the migrate_vma structure) into this
> function and maybe also give it a more descriptive name.
Sure, I will give this a try. The name is already very descriptive, will
come up with an appropriate name.
BTW this file and the fuction prefixes in this file started out with
kvmppc_hmm, switched to kvmppc_devm when HMM routines weren't used anymore.
Now with the use of only non-dev versions, planning to swtich to
kvmppc_uvmem_
>
> > +static void kvmppc_devm_page_free(struct page *page)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > + struct kvmppc_devm_page_pvt *pvt;
> > +
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&kvmppc_devm_pfn_lock, flags);
> > + pvt = page->zone_device_data;
> > + page->zone_device_data = NULL;
> > +
> > + bitmap_clear(kvmppc_devm_pfn_bitmap,
> > + pfn - (kvmppc_devm_pgmap.res.start >> PAGE_SHIFT), 1);
>
> Nit: I'd just initialize pfn to the value you want from the start.
> That makes the code a little easier to read, and keeps a tiny bit more
> code outside the spinlock.
>
> unsigned long pfn = page_to_pfn(page) -
> (kvmppc_devm_pgmap.res.start >> PAGE_SHIFT);
>
> ..
>
> bitmap_clear(kvmppc_devm_pfn_bitmap, pfn, 1);
Sure.
>
>
> > + kvmppc_devm_pgmap.type = MEMORY_DEVICE_PRIVATE;
> > + kvmppc_devm_pgmap.res = *res;
> > + kvmppc_devm_pgmap.ops = &kvmppc_devm_ops;
> > + addr = memremap_pages(&kvmppc_devm_pgmap, -1);
>
> This -1 should be NUMA_NO_NODE for clarity.
Right.
Regards,
Bharata.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.ibm.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: linuxram@us.ibm.com, cclaudio@linux.ibm.com,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, jglisse@redhat.com,
aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, paulus@au1.ibm.com,
sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/7] kvmppc: Driver to manage pages of secure guest
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 09:12:59 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190830034259.GD31913@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190829083810.GA13039@lst.de>
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 10:38:10AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 03:56:14PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Bits 60:56 in the rmap entry will be used to identify the
> > + * different uses/functions of rmap.
> > + */
> > +#define KVMPPC_RMAP_DEVM_PFN (0x2ULL << 56)
>
> How did you come up with this specific value?
Different usage types of RMAP array are being defined.
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1149791/
The above value is reserved for device pfn usage.
>
> > +
> > +static inline bool kvmppc_rmap_is_devm_pfn(unsigned long pfn)
> > +{
> > + return !!(pfn & KVMPPC_RMAP_DEVM_PFN);
> > +}
>
> No need for !! when returning a bool. Also the helper seems a little
> pointless, just opencoding it would make the code more readable in my
> opinion.
I expect similar routines for other usages of RMAP to come up.
>
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_UV
> > +extern int kvmppc_devm_init(void);
> > +extern void kvmppc_devm_free(void);
>
> There is no need for extern in a function declaration.
>
> > +static int
> > +kvmppc_devm_migrate_alloc_and_copy(struct migrate_vma *mig,
> > + unsigned long *rmap, unsigned long gpa,
> > + unsigned int lpid, unsigned long page_shift)
> > +{
> > + struct page *spage = migrate_pfn_to_page(*mig->src);
> > + unsigned long pfn = *mig->src >> MIGRATE_PFN_SHIFT;
> > + struct page *dpage;
> > +
> > + *mig->dst = 0;
> > + if (!spage || !(*mig->src & MIGRATE_PFN_MIGRATE))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + dpage = kvmppc_devm_get_page(rmap, gpa, lpid);
> > + if (!dpage)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + if (spage)
> > + uv_page_in(lpid, pfn << page_shift, gpa, 0, page_shift);
> > +
> > + *mig->dst = migrate_pfn(page_to_pfn(dpage)) | MIGRATE_PFN_LOCKED;
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> I think you can just merge this trivial helper into the only caller.
Yes I can, but felt it is nicely abstracted out to a function right now.
>
> > +static int
> > +kvmppc_devm_fault_migrate_alloc_and_copy(struct migrate_vma *mig,
> > + unsigned long page_shift)
> > +{
> > + struct page *dpage, *spage;
> > + struct kvmppc_devm_page_pvt *pvt;
> > + unsigned long pfn;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + spage = migrate_pfn_to_page(*mig->src);
> > + if (!spage || !(*mig->src & MIGRATE_PFN_MIGRATE))
> > + return 0;
> > + if (!is_zone_device_page(spage))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + dpage = alloc_page_vma(GFP_HIGHUSER, mig->vma, mig->start);
> > + if (!dpage)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + lock_page(dpage);
> > + pvt = spage->zone_device_data;
> > +
> > + pfn = page_to_pfn(dpage);
> > + ret = uv_page_out(pvt->lpid, pfn << page_shift, pvt->gpa, 0,
> > + page_shift);
> > + if (ret == U_SUCCESS)
> > + *mig->dst = migrate_pfn(pfn) | MIGRATE_PFN_LOCKED;
> > + else {
> > + unlock_page(dpage);
> > + __free_page(dpage);
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
>
> Here we actually have two callers, but they have a fair amount of
> duplicate code in them. I think you want to move that common
> code (including setting up the migrate_vma structure) into this
> function and maybe also give it a more descriptive name.
Sure, I will give this a try. The name is already very descriptive, will
come up with an appropriate name.
BTW this file and the fuction prefixes in this file started out with
kvmppc_hmm, switched to kvmppc_devm when HMM routines weren't used anymore.
Now with the use of only non-dev versions, planning to swtich to
kvmppc_uvmem_
>
> > +static void kvmppc_devm_page_free(struct page *page)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > + struct kvmppc_devm_page_pvt *pvt;
> > +
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&kvmppc_devm_pfn_lock, flags);
> > + pvt = page->zone_device_data;
> > + page->zone_device_data = NULL;
> > +
> > + bitmap_clear(kvmppc_devm_pfn_bitmap,
> > + pfn - (kvmppc_devm_pgmap.res.start >> PAGE_SHIFT), 1);
>
> Nit: I'd just initialize pfn to the value you want from the start.
> That makes the code a little easier to read, and keeps a tiny bit more
> code outside the spinlock.
>
> unsigned long pfn = page_to_pfn(page) -
> (kvmppc_devm_pgmap.res.start >> PAGE_SHIFT);
>
> ..
>
> bitmap_clear(kvmppc_devm_pfn_bitmap, pfn, 1);
Sure.
>
>
> > + kvmppc_devm_pgmap.type = MEMORY_DEVICE_PRIVATE;
> > + kvmppc_devm_pgmap.res = *res;
> > + kvmppc_devm_pgmap.ops = &kvmppc_devm_ops;
> > + addr = memremap_pages(&kvmppc_devm_pgmap, -1);
>
> This -1 should be NUMA_NO_NODE for clarity.
Right.
Regards,
Bharata.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.ibm.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, paulus@au1.ibm.com,
aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jglisse@redhat.com,
linuxram@us.ibm.com, sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
cclaudio@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/7] kvmppc: Driver to manage pages of secure guest
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 09:12:59 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190830034259.GD31913@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190829083810.GA13039@lst.de>
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 10:38:10AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 03:56:14PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Bits 60:56 in the rmap entry will be used to identify the
> > + * different uses/functions of rmap.
> > + */
> > +#define KVMPPC_RMAP_DEVM_PFN (0x2ULL << 56)
>
> How did you come up with this specific value?
Different usage types of RMAP array are being defined.
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1149791/
The above value is reserved for device pfn usage.
>
> > +
> > +static inline bool kvmppc_rmap_is_devm_pfn(unsigned long pfn)
> > +{
> > + return !!(pfn & KVMPPC_RMAP_DEVM_PFN);
> > +}
>
> No need for !! when returning a bool. Also the helper seems a little
> pointless, just opencoding it would make the code more readable in my
> opinion.
I expect similar routines for other usages of RMAP to come up.
>
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_UV
> > +extern int kvmppc_devm_init(void);
> > +extern void kvmppc_devm_free(void);
>
> There is no need for extern in a function declaration.
>
> > +static int
> > +kvmppc_devm_migrate_alloc_and_copy(struct migrate_vma *mig,
> > + unsigned long *rmap, unsigned long gpa,
> > + unsigned int lpid, unsigned long page_shift)
> > +{
> > + struct page *spage = migrate_pfn_to_page(*mig->src);
> > + unsigned long pfn = *mig->src >> MIGRATE_PFN_SHIFT;
> > + struct page *dpage;
> > +
> > + *mig->dst = 0;
> > + if (!spage || !(*mig->src & MIGRATE_PFN_MIGRATE))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + dpage = kvmppc_devm_get_page(rmap, gpa, lpid);
> > + if (!dpage)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + if (spage)
> > + uv_page_in(lpid, pfn << page_shift, gpa, 0, page_shift);
> > +
> > + *mig->dst = migrate_pfn(page_to_pfn(dpage)) | MIGRATE_PFN_LOCKED;
> > + return 0;
> > +}
>
> I think you can just merge this trivial helper into the only caller.
Yes I can, but felt it is nicely abstracted out to a function right now.
>
> > +static int
> > +kvmppc_devm_fault_migrate_alloc_and_copy(struct migrate_vma *mig,
> > + unsigned long page_shift)
> > +{
> > + struct page *dpage, *spage;
> > + struct kvmppc_devm_page_pvt *pvt;
> > + unsigned long pfn;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + spage = migrate_pfn_to_page(*mig->src);
> > + if (!spage || !(*mig->src & MIGRATE_PFN_MIGRATE))
> > + return 0;
> > + if (!is_zone_device_page(spage))
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + dpage = alloc_page_vma(GFP_HIGHUSER, mig->vma, mig->start);
> > + if (!dpage)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + lock_page(dpage);
> > + pvt = spage->zone_device_data;
> > +
> > + pfn = page_to_pfn(dpage);
> > + ret = uv_page_out(pvt->lpid, pfn << page_shift, pvt->gpa, 0,
> > + page_shift);
> > + if (ret == U_SUCCESS)
> > + *mig->dst = migrate_pfn(pfn) | MIGRATE_PFN_LOCKED;
> > + else {
> > + unlock_page(dpage);
> > + __free_page(dpage);
> > + }
> > + return ret;
> > +}
>
> Here we actually have two callers, but they have a fair amount of
> duplicate code in them. I think you want to move that common
> code (including setting up the migrate_vma structure) into this
> function and maybe also give it a more descriptive name.
Sure, I will give this a try. The name is already very descriptive, will
come up with an appropriate name.
BTW this file and the fuction prefixes in this file started out with
kvmppc_hmm, switched to kvmppc_devm when HMM routines weren't used anymore.
Now with the use of only non-dev versions, planning to swtich to
kvmppc_uvmem_
>
> > +static void kvmppc_devm_page_free(struct page *page)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > + struct kvmppc_devm_page_pvt *pvt;
> > +
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&kvmppc_devm_pfn_lock, flags);
> > + pvt = page->zone_device_data;
> > + page->zone_device_data = NULL;
> > +
> > + bitmap_clear(kvmppc_devm_pfn_bitmap,
> > + pfn - (kvmppc_devm_pgmap.res.start >> PAGE_SHIFT), 1);
>
> Nit: I'd just initialize pfn to the value you want from the start.
> That makes the code a little easier to read, and keeps a tiny bit more
> code outside the spinlock.
>
> unsigned long pfn = page_to_pfn(page) -
> (kvmppc_devm_pgmap.res.start >> PAGE_SHIFT);
>
> ..
>
> bitmap_clear(kvmppc_devm_pfn_bitmap, pfn, 1);
Sure.
>
>
> > + kvmppc_devm_pgmap.type = MEMORY_DEVICE_PRIVATE;
> > + kvmppc_devm_pgmap.res = *res;
> > + kvmppc_devm_pgmap.ops = &kvmppc_devm_ops;
> > + addr = memremap_pages(&kvmppc_devm_pgmap, -1);
>
> This -1 should be NUMA_NO_NODE for clarity.
Right.
Regards,
Bharata.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-30 3:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-22 10:26 [PATCH v7 0/7] KVMPPC driver to manage secure guest pages Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:38 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:26 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:26 ` [PATCH v7 1/7] kvmppc: Driver to manage pages of secure guest Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:38 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:26 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-29 3:02 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2019-08-29 3:02 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2019-08-29 3:02 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2019-08-29 6:56 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-29 6:56 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-29 6:56 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-29 19:39 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2019-08-29 19:39 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2019-08-29 19:39 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2019-08-30 11:13 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-30 11:25 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-30 11:13 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-29 8:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-29 8:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-29 8:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-30 3:42 ` Bharata B Rao [this message]
2019-08-30 3:54 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-30 3:42 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-09-02 7:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-09-02 7:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-09-02 7:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-09-06 11:36 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-09-06 11:48 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-09-06 11:36 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-09-06 16:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-09-06 16:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-09-06 16:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-22 10:26 ` [PATCH v7 2/7] kvmppc: Shared pages support for secure guests Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:38 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:26 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-29 3:04 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2019-08-29 3:04 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2019-08-29 3:04 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2019-08-29 6:58 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-29 6:58 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-29 6:58 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:26 ` [PATCH v7 3/7] kvmppc: H_SVM_INIT_START and H_SVM_INIT_DONE hcalls Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:38 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:26 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:26 ` [PATCH v7 4/7] kvmppc: Handle memory plug/unplug to secure VM Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:38 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:26 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-29 8:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-29 8:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-29 8:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-22 10:26 ` [PATCH v7 5/7] kvmppc: Radix changes for secure guest Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:38 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:26 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-29 3:05 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2019-08-29 3:05 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2019-08-29 3:05 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2019-08-29 7:57 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-29 7:58 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-29 7:57 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:26 ` [PATCH v7 6/7] kvmppc: Support reset of " Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:38 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:26 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:26 ` [PATCH v7 7/7] KVM: PPC: Ultravisor: Add PPC_UV config option Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:38 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-22 10:26 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-23 4:17 ` [PATCH v7 0/7] KVMPPC driver to manage secure guest pages Paul Mackerras
2019-08-23 4:17 ` Paul Mackerras
2019-08-23 4:17 ` Paul Mackerras
2019-08-23 6:57 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-23 6:58 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-23 6:57 ` Bharata B Rao
2019-08-23 11:57 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-08-23 11:57 ` Michael Ellerman
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=20190830034259.GD31913@in.ibm.com \
--to=bharata@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=cclaudio@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
--cc=paulus@au1.ibm.com \
--cc=sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.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.