From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
virtio-fs-list <virtio-fs@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH v3 2/3] dax: Add a wakeup mode parameter to put_unlocked_entry()
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 15:13:05 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210421191305.GG1579961@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4g2raipYhivwbiSvsHmSdgLO8wphh5dhY3hpjwko9G4Hw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 12:09:54PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 7:01 AM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 09:34:20AM +0200, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > > On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 17:36:35 -0400
> > > Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > As of now put_unlocked_entry() always wakes up next waiter. In next
> > > > patches we want to wake up all waiters at one callsite. Hence, add a
> > > > parameter to the function.
> > > >
> > > > This patch does not introduce any change of behavior.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > fs/dax.c | 13 +++++++------
> > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
> > > > index 00978d0838b1..f19d76a6a493 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/dax.c
> > > > +++ b/fs/dax.c
> > > > @@ -275,11 +275,12 @@ static void wait_entry_unlocked(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
> > > > finish_wait(wq, &ewait.wait);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > -static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
> > > > +static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry,
> > > > + enum dax_entry_wake_mode mode)
> > > > {
> > > > /* If we were the only waiter woken, wake the next one */
> > >
> > > With this change, the comment is no longer accurate since the
> > > function can now wake all waiters if passed mode == WAKE_ALL.
> > > Also, it paraphrases the code which is simple enough, so I'd
> > > simply drop it.
> > >
> > > This is minor though and it shouldn't prevent this fix to go
> > > forward.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
> >
> > Ok, here is the updated patch which drops that comment line.
> >
> > Vivek
>
> Hi Vivek,
>
> Can you get in the habit of not replying inline with new patches like
> this? Collect the review feedback, take a pause, and resend the full
> series so tooling like b4 and patchwork can track when a new posting
> supersedes a previous one. As is, this inline style inflicts manual
> effort on the maintainer.
Hi Dan,
Sure. I will avoid doing this updated inline patch style. I will post new
version of patch series.
Thanks
Vivek
>
> >
> > Subject: dax: Add a wakeup mode parameter to put_unlocked_entry()
> >
> > As of now put_unlocked_entry() always wakes up next waiter. In next
> > patches we want to wake up all waiters at one callsite. Hence, add a
> > parameter to the function.
> >
> > This patch does not introduce any change of behavior.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > fs/dax.c | 14 +++++++-------
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > Index: redhat-linux/fs/dax.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- redhat-linux.orig/fs/dax.c 2021-04-20 09:55:45.105069893 -0400
> > +++ redhat-linux/fs/dax.c 2021-04-20 09:56:27.685822730 -0400
> > @@ -275,11 +275,11 @@ static void wait_entry_unlocked(struct x
> > finish_wait(wq, &ewait.wait);
> > }
> >
> > -static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
> > +static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry,
> > + enum dax_entry_wake_mode mode)
> > {
> > - /* If we were the only waiter woken, wake the next one */
> > if (entry && !dax_is_conflict(entry))
> > - dax_wake_entry(xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > + dax_wake_entry(xas, entry, mode);
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -633,7 +633,7 @@ struct page *dax_layout_busy_page_range(
> > entry = get_unlocked_entry(&xas, 0);
> > if (entry)
> > page = dax_busy_page(entry);
> > - put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry);
> > + put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > if (page)
> > break;
> > if (++scanned % XA_CHECK_SCHED)
> > @@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ static int __dax_invalidate_entry(struct
> > mapping->nrexceptional--;
> > ret = 1;
> > out:
> > - put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry);
> > + put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > xas_unlock_irq(&xas);
> > return ret;
> > }
> > @@ -954,7 +954,7 @@ static int dax_writeback_one(struct xa_s
> > return ret;
> >
> > put_unlocked:
> > - put_unlocked_entry(xas, entry);
> > + put_unlocked_entry(xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -1695,7 +1695,7 @@ dax_insert_pfn_mkwrite(struct vm_fault *
> > /* Did we race with someone splitting entry or so? */
> > if (!entry || dax_is_conflict(entry) ||
> > (order == 0 && !dax_is_pte_entry(entry))) {
> > - put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry);
> > + put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > xas_unlock_irq(&xas);
> > trace_dax_insert_pfn_mkwrite_no_entry(mapping->host, vmf,
> > VM_FAULT_NOPAGE);
> >
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
virtio-fs-list <virtio-fs@redhat.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH v3 2/3] dax: Add a wakeup mode parameter to put_unlocked_entry()
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 15:13:05 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210421191305.GG1579961@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4g2raipYhivwbiSvsHmSdgLO8wphh5dhY3hpjwko9G4Hw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 12:09:54PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 7:01 AM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 09:34:20AM +0200, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > > On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 17:36:35 -0400
> > > Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > As of now put_unlocked_entry() always wakes up next waiter. In next
> > > > patches we want to wake up all waiters at one callsite. Hence, add a
> > > > parameter to the function.
> > > >
> > > > This patch does not introduce any change of behavior.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > fs/dax.c | 13 +++++++------
> > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
> > > > index 00978d0838b1..f19d76a6a493 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/dax.c
> > > > +++ b/fs/dax.c
> > > > @@ -275,11 +275,12 @@ static void wait_entry_unlocked(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
> > > > finish_wait(wq, &ewait.wait);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > -static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
> > > > +static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry,
> > > > + enum dax_entry_wake_mode mode)
> > > > {
> > > > /* If we were the only waiter woken, wake the next one */
> > >
> > > With this change, the comment is no longer accurate since the
> > > function can now wake all waiters if passed mode == WAKE_ALL.
> > > Also, it paraphrases the code which is simple enough, so I'd
> > > simply drop it.
> > >
> > > This is minor though and it shouldn't prevent this fix to go
> > > forward.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
> >
> > Ok, here is the updated patch which drops that comment line.
> >
> > Vivek
>
> Hi Vivek,
>
> Can you get in the habit of not replying inline with new patches like
> this? Collect the review feedback, take a pause, and resend the full
> series so tooling like b4 and patchwork can track when a new posting
> supersedes a previous one. As is, this inline style inflicts manual
> effort on the maintainer.
Hi Dan,
Sure. I will avoid doing this updated inline patch style. I will post new
version of patch series.
Thanks
Vivek
>
> >
> > Subject: dax: Add a wakeup mode parameter to put_unlocked_entry()
> >
> > As of now put_unlocked_entry() always wakes up next waiter. In next
> > patches we want to wake up all waiters at one callsite. Hence, add a
> > parameter to the function.
> >
> > This patch does not introduce any change of behavior.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > fs/dax.c | 14 +++++++-------
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > Index: redhat-linux/fs/dax.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- redhat-linux.orig/fs/dax.c 2021-04-20 09:55:45.105069893 -0400
> > +++ redhat-linux/fs/dax.c 2021-04-20 09:56:27.685822730 -0400
> > @@ -275,11 +275,11 @@ static void wait_entry_unlocked(struct x
> > finish_wait(wq, &ewait.wait);
> > }
> >
> > -static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
> > +static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry,
> > + enum dax_entry_wake_mode mode)
> > {
> > - /* If we were the only waiter woken, wake the next one */
> > if (entry && !dax_is_conflict(entry))
> > - dax_wake_entry(xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > + dax_wake_entry(xas, entry, mode);
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -633,7 +633,7 @@ struct page *dax_layout_busy_page_range(
> > entry = get_unlocked_entry(&xas, 0);
> > if (entry)
> > page = dax_busy_page(entry);
> > - put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry);
> > + put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > if (page)
> > break;
> > if (++scanned % XA_CHECK_SCHED)
> > @@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ static int __dax_invalidate_entry(struct
> > mapping->nrexceptional--;
> > ret = 1;
> > out:
> > - put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry);
> > + put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > xas_unlock_irq(&xas);
> > return ret;
> > }
> > @@ -954,7 +954,7 @@ static int dax_writeback_one(struct xa_s
> > return ret;
> >
> > put_unlocked:
> > - put_unlocked_entry(xas, entry);
> > + put_unlocked_entry(xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -1695,7 +1695,7 @@ dax_insert_pfn_mkwrite(struct vm_fault *
> > /* Did we race with someone splitting entry or so? */
> > if (!entry || dax_is_conflict(entry) ||
> > (order == 0 && !dax_is_pte_entry(entry))) {
> > - put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry);
> > + put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > xas_unlock_irq(&xas);
> > trace_dax_insert_pfn_mkwrite_no_entry(mapping->host, vmf,
> > VM_FAULT_NOPAGE);
> >
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
virtio-fs-list <virtio-fs@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Virtio-fs] [PATCH v3 2/3] dax: Add a wakeup mode parameter to put_unlocked_entry()
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 15:13:05 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210421191305.GG1579961@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4g2raipYhivwbiSvsHmSdgLO8wphh5dhY3hpjwko9G4Hw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 12:09:54PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 7:01 AM Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 09:34:20AM +0200, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > > On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 17:36:35 -0400
> > > Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > As of now put_unlocked_entry() always wakes up next waiter. In next
> > > > patches we want to wake up all waiters at one callsite. Hence, add a
> > > > parameter to the function.
> > > >
> > > > This patch does not introduce any change of behavior.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > fs/dax.c | 13 +++++++------
> > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
> > > > index 00978d0838b1..f19d76a6a493 100644
> > > > --- a/fs/dax.c
> > > > +++ b/fs/dax.c
> > > > @@ -275,11 +275,12 @@ static void wait_entry_unlocked(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
> > > > finish_wait(wq, &ewait.wait);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > -static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
> > > > +static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry,
> > > > + enum dax_entry_wake_mode mode)
> > > > {
> > > > /* If we were the only waiter woken, wake the next one */
> > >
> > > With this change, the comment is no longer accurate since the
> > > function can now wake all waiters if passed mode == WAKE_ALL.
> > > Also, it paraphrases the code which is simple enough, so I'd
> > > simply drop it.
> > >
> > > This is minor though and it shouldn't prevent this fix to go
> > > forward.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
> >
> > Ok, here is the updated patch which drops that comment line.
> >
> > Vivek
>
> Hi Vivek,
>
> Can you get in the habit of not replying inline with new patches like
> this? Collect the review feedback, take a pause, and resend the full
> series so tooling like b4 and patchwork can track when a new posting
> supersedes a previous one. As is, this inline style inflicts manual
> effort on the maintainer.
Hi Dan,
Sure. I will avoid doing this updated inline patch style. I will post new
version of patch series.
Thanks
Vivek
>
> >
> > Subject: dax: Add a wakeup mode parameter to put_unlocked_entry()
> >
> > As of now put_unlocked_entry() always wakes up next waiter. In next
> > patches we want to wake up all waiters at one callsite. Hence, add a
> > parameter to the function.
> >
> > This patch does not introduce any change of behavior.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > fs/dax.c | 14 +++++++-------
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > Index: redhat-linux/fs/dax.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- redhat-linux.orig/fs/dax.c 2021-04-20 09:55:45.105069893 -0400
> > +++ redhat-linux/fs/dax.c 2021-04-20 09:56:27.685822730 -0400
> > @@ -275,11 +275,11 @@ static void wait_entry_unlocked(struct x
> > finish_wait(wq, &ewait.wait);
> > }
> >
> > -static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry)
> > +static void put_unlocked_entry(struct xa_state *xas, void *entry,
> > + enum dax_entry_wake_mode mode)
> > {
> > - /* If we were the only waiter woken, wake the next one */
> > if (entry && !dax_is_conflict(entry))
> > - dax_wake_entry(xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > + dax_wake_entry(xas, entry, mode);
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -633,7 +633,7 @@ struct page *dax_layout_busy_page_range(
> > entry = get_unlocked_entry(&xas, 0);
> > if (entry)
> > page = dax_busy_page(entry);
> > - put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry);
> > + put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > if (page)
> > break;
> > if (++scanned % XA_CHECK_SCHED)
> > @@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ static int __dax_invalidate_entry(struct
> > mapping->nrexceptional--;
> > ret = 1;
> > out:
> > - put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry);
> > + put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > xas_unlock_irq(&xas);
> > return ret;
> > }
> > @@ -954,7 +954,7 @@ static int dax_writeback_one(struct xa_s
> > return ret;
> >
> > put_unlocked:
> > - put_unlocked_entry(xas, entry);
> > + put_unlocked_entry(xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -1695,7 +1695,7 @@ dax_insert_pfn_mkwrite(struct vm_fault *
> > /* Did we race with someone splitting entry or so? */
> > if (!entry || dax_is_conflict(entry) ||
> > (order == 0 && !dax_is_pte_entry(entry))) {
> > - put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry);
> > + put_unlocked_entry(&xas, entry, WAKE_NEXT);
> > xas_unlock_irq(&xas);
> > trace_dax_insert_pfn_mkwrite_no_entry(mapping->host, vmf,
> > VM_FAULT_NOPAGE);
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-21 19:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-19 21:36 [PATCH v3 0/3] dax: Fix missed wakeup in put_unlocked_entry() Vivek Goyal
2021-04-19 21:36 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-19 21:36 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2021-04-19 21:36 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] dax: Add an enum for specifying dax wakup mode Vivek Goyal
2021-04-19 21:36 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-19 21:36 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2021-04-20 7:19 ` Greg Kurz
2021-04-20 7:19 ` Greg Kurz
2021-04-20 7:19 ` Greg Kurz
2021-04-21 9:24 ` Jan Kara
2021-04-21 9:24 ` Jan Kara
2021-04-21 9:24 ` [Virtio-fs] " Jan Kara
2021-04-21 15:56 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-21 15:56 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-21 15:56 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2021-04-21 16:16 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-04-21 16:16 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-04-21 16:16 ` [Virtio-fs] " Matthew Wilcox
2021-04-21 17:21 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-21 17:21 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-21 17:21 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2021-04-19 21:36 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] dax: Add a wakeup mode parameter to put_unlocked_entry() Vivek Goyal
2021-04-19 21:36 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-19 21:36 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2021-04-20 7:34 ` Greg Kurz
2021-04-20 7:34 ` Greg Kurz
2021-04-20 14:00 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-20 14:00 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-20 14:00 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-21 19:09 ` Dan Williams
2021-04-21 19:09 ` Dan Williams
2021-04-21 19:09 ` Dan Williams
2021-04-21 19:13 ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2021-04-21 19:13 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-21 19:13 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-22 6:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-22 6:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-22 6:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-22 16:12 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-22 16:12 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-22 16:12 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-22 20:01 ` Dan Williams
2021-04-22 20:01 ` Dan Williams
2021-04-22 20:01 ` Dan Williams
2021-04-22 20:07 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-22 20:07 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-22 20:07 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-05-17 17:10 ` Dan Williams
2021-05-17 17:10 ` Dan Williams
2021-05-17 17:10 ` Dan Williams
2021-04-21 17:39 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-21 17:39 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-21 17:39 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-21 9:25 ` Jan Kara
2021-04-21 9:25 ` Jan Kara
2021-04-21 9:25 ` [Virtio-fs] " Jan Kara
2021-04-19 21:36 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] dax: Wake up all waiters after invalidating dax entry Vivek Goyal
2021-04-19 21:36 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-04-19 21:36 ` [Virtio-fs] " Vivek Goyal
2021-04-21 9:26 ` Jan Kara
2021-04-21 9:26 ` Jan Kara
2021-04-21 9:26 ` [Virtio-fs] " Jan Kara
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=20210421191305.GG1579961@redhat.com \
--to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=groug@kaod.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=virtio-fs@redhat.com \
--cc=willy@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.