From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
acpica-devel@lists.linux.dev,
"Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"Will Deacon" <will@kernel.org>,
"Paul Walmsley" <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
"Albert Ou" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
"Len Brown" <lenb@kernel.org>,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"Anup Patel" <anup@brainfault.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Samuel Holland" <samuel.holland@sifive.com>,
"Robert Moore" <robert.moore@intel.com>,
"Haibo1 Xu" <haibo1.xu@intel.com>,
"Conor Dooley" <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
"Andrew Jones" <ajones@ventanamicro.com>,
"Atish Kumar Patra" <atishp@rivosinc.com>,
"Andrei Warkentin" <andrei.warkentin@intel.com>,
"Marc Zyngier" <maz@kernel.org>, "Björn Töpel" <bjorn@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 03/20] PCI: Make pci_create_root_bus() declare its reliance on MSI domains
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:46:53 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240416204653.GA164172@bhelgaas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zh41pOmtAJ0EcbiN@sunil-laptop>
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 01:54:04PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> Hi Bjorn,
>
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 06:15:23PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 10:30:56PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> > > Similar to commit 9ec37efb8783 ("PCI/MSI: Make
> > > pci_host_common_probe() declare its reliance on MSI domains"), declare
> > > this dependency for PCI probe in ACPI based flow.
> > >
> > > This is required especially for RISC-V platforms where MSI controller
> > > can be absent. However, setting this for all architectures seem to cause
> > > issues on non RISC-V architectures [1]. Hence, enabled this only for
> > > RISC-V.
> > >
> > > [1] - https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202403041047.791cb18e-oliver.sang@intel.com
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/pci/probe.c | 3 +++
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > > index 1325fbae2f28..e09915bee2ee 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > > @@ -3048,6 +3048,9 @@ struct pci_bus *pci_create_root_bus(struct device *parent, int bus,
> > > bridge->sysdata = sysdata;
> > > bridge->busnr = bus;
> > > bridge->ops = ops;
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV
> > > + bridge->msi_domain = true;
> > > +#endif
> >
> > Ugh. I looked at [1], but that's not a very good justification for
> > this #ifdef. The fault mentioned in [1] would need to be fixed, but
> > not this way.
>
> Thank you again for the feedback!
>
> I agree. This is due to my limitation with knowledge and resources to
> debug the issue happening on non-UEFI x86 system with some particular
> PCIe RC. Also, I was worried that we get into a rat hole of
> assumptions/quirks with various architecture/PCIe RC combinations.
The problem is that adding #ifdefs like this leads to a rat hole
itself. We need to understand and fix the underlying issue instead.
> For ex: I think the issue is, somehow MSI domain is not set at the time
> of PCI host bridge registration in pci_register_host_bridge() causing
> PCI_BUS_FLAGS_NO_MSI to be set. This causes pci_alloc_irq_vectors() to
> fail. In portdrv.c, pcie_init_service_irqs() doesn't switch to INTx
> handling if MSI can not be used. It switches only if pcie_pme_no_msi()
> returns true. I couldn't find who actually sets up MSI domain bit late
> on this platform so that it somehow worked when we didn't set this flag.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't have system to root cause and fix this issue with
> confidence. Also, I don't know if any other architectures have similar
> issues which are not caught yet. Hence, I thought it may be better
> just restrict the change to RISC-V.
It sounds like the above is a good start on analyzing the problem.
I don't quite understand your statement that pcie_init_service_irqs()
doesn't fall back to INTx when MSI/MSI-X is not available.
I'm looking at this:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv.c?id=v6.8#n177
pcie_port_enable_irq_vec() attempts
pci_alloc_irq_vectors(PCI_IRQ_MSIX | PCI_IRQ_MSI) and returns 0 if
successful. If it returns failure, it looks like
pcie_init_service_irqs() *does* fall through to trying INTx
(PCI_IRQ_LEGACY).
Bjorn
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
acpica-devel@lists.linux.dev,
"Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"Will Deacon" <will@kernel.org>,
"Paul Walmsley" <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
"Albert Ou" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
"Len Brown" <lenb@kernel.org>,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"Anup Patel" <anup@brainfault.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Samuel Holland" <samuel.holland@sifive.com>,
"Robert Moore" <robert.moore@intel.com>,
"Haibo1 Xu" <haibo1.xu@intel.com>,
"Conor Dooley" <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
"Andrew Jones" <ajones@ventanamicro.com>,
"Atish Kumar Patra" <atishp@rivosinc.com>,
"Andrei Warkentin" <andrei.warkentin@intel.com>,
"Marc Zyngier" <maz@kernel.org>, "Björn Töpel" <bjorn@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 03/20] PCI: Make pci_create_root_bus() declare its reliance on MSI domains
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:46:53 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240416204653.GA164172@bhelgaas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zh41pOmtAJ0EcbiN@sunil-laptop>
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 01:54:04PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> Hi Bjorn,
>
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 06:15:23PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 10:30:56PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> > > Similar to commit 9ec37efb8783 ("PCI/MSI: Make
> > > pci_host_common_probe() declare its reliance on MSI domains"), declare
> > > this dependency for PCI probe in ACPI based flow.
> > >
> > > This is required especially for RISC-V platforms where MSI controller
> > > can be absent. However, setting this for all architectures seem to cause
> > > issues on non RISC-V architectures [1]. Hence, enabled this only for
> > > RISC-V.
> > >
> > > [1] - https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202403041047.791cb18e-oliver.sang@intel.com
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/pci/probe.c | 3 +++
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > > index 1325fbae2f28..e09915bee2ee 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > > @@ -3048,6 +3048,9 @@ struct pci_bus *pci_create_root_bus(struct device *parent, int bus,
> > > bridge->sysdata = sysdata;
> > > bridge->busnr = bus;
> > > bridge->ops = ops;
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV
> > > + bridge->msi_domain = true;
> > > +#endif
> >
> > Ugh. I looked at [1], but that's not a very good justification for
> > this #ifdef. The fault mentioned in [1] would need to be fixed, but
> > not this way.
>
> Thank you again for the feedback!
>
> I agree. This is due to my limitation with knowledge and resources to
> debug the issue happening on non-UEFI x86 system with some particular
> PCIe RC. Also, I was worried that we get into a rat hole of
> assumptions/quirks with various architecture/PCIe RC combinations.
The problem is that adding #ifdefs like this leads to a rat hole
itself. We need to understand and fix the underlying issue instead.
> For ex: I think the issue is, somehow MSI domain is not set at the time
> of PCI host bridge registration in pci_register_host_bridge() causing
> PCI_BUS_FLAGS_NO_MSI to be set. This causes pci_alloc_irq_vectors() to
> fail. In portdrv.c, pcie_init_service_irqs() doesn't switch to INTx
> handling if MSI can not be used. It switches only if pcie_pme_no_msi()
> returns true. I couldn't find who actually sets up MSI domain bit late
> on this platform so that it somehow worked when we didn't set this flag.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't have system to root cause and fix this issue with
> confidence. Also, I don't know if any other architectures have similar
> issues which are not caught yet. Hence, I thought it may be better
> just restrict the change to RISC-V.
It sounds like the above is a good start on analyzing the problem.
I don't quite understand your statement that pcie_init_service_irqs()
doesn't fall back to INTx when MSI/MSI-X is not available.
I'm looking at this:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv.c?id=v6.8#n177
pcie_port_enable_irq_vec() attempts
pci_alloc_irq_vectors(PCI_IRQ_MSIX | PCI_IRQ_MSI) and returns 0 if
successful. If it returns failure, it looks like
pcie_init_service_irqs() *does* fall through to trying INTx
(PCI_IRQ_LEGACY).
Bjorn
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
acpica-devel@lists.linux.dev,
"Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"Will Deacon" <will@kernel.org>,
"Paul Walmsley" <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
"Albert Ou" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
"Len Brown" <lenb@kernel.org>,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"Anup Patel" <anup@brainfault.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Samuel Holland" <samuel.holland@sifive.com>,
"Robert Moore" <robert.moore@intel.com>,
"Haibo1 Xu" <haibo1.xu@intel.com>,
"Conor Dooley" <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
"Andrew Jones" <ajones@ventanamicro.com>,
"Atish Kumar Patra" <atishp@rivosinc.com>,
"Andrei Warkentin" <andrei.warkentin@intel.com>,
"Marc Zyngier" <maz@kernel.org>, "Björn Töpel" <bjorn@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 03/20] PCI: Make pci_create_root_bus() declare its reliance on MSI domains
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2024 15:46:53 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240416204653.GA164172@bhelgaas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zh41pOmtAJ0EcbiN@sunil-laptop>
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 01:54:04PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> Hi Bjorn,
>
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 06:15:23PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 10:30:56PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> > > Similar to commit 9ec37efb8783 ("PCI/MSI: Make
> > > pci_host_common_probe() declare its reliance on MSI domains"), declare
> > > this dependency for PCI probe in ACPI based flow.
> > >
> > > This is required especially for RISC-V platforms where MSI controller
> > > can be absent. However, setting this for all architectures seem to cause
> > > issues on non RISC-V architectures [1]. Hence, enabled this only for
> > > RISC-V.
> > >
> > > [1] - https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202403041047.791cb18e-oliver.sang@intel.com
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/pci/probe.c | 3 +++
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > > index 1325fbae2f28..e09915bee2ee 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> > > @@ -3048,6 +3048,9 @@ struct pci_bus *pci_create_root_bus(struct device *parent, int bus,
> > > bridge->sysdata = sysdata;
> > > bridge->busnr = bus;
> > > bridge->ops = ops;
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV
> > > + bridge->msi_domain = true;
> > > +#endif
> >
> > Ugh. I looked at [1], but that's not a very good justification for
> > this #ifdef. The fault mentioned in [1] would need to be fixed, but
> > not this way.
>
> Thank you again for the feedback!
>
> I agree. This is due to my limitation with knowledge and resources to
> debug the issue happening on non-UEFI x86 system with some particular
> PCIe RC. Also, I was worried that we get into a rat hole of
> assumptions/quirks with various architecture/PCIe RC combinations.
The problem is that adding #ifdefs like this leads to a rat hole
itself. We need to understand and fix the underlying issue instead.
> For ex: I think the issue is, somehow MSI domain is not set at the time
> of PCI host bridge registration in pci_register_host_bridge() causing
> PCI_BUS_FLAGS_NO_MSI to be set. This causes pci_alloc_irq_vectors() to
> fail. In portdrv.c, pcie_init_service_irqs() doesn't switch to INTx
> handling if MSI can not be used. It switches only if pcie_pme_no_msi()
> returns true. I couldn't find who actually sets up MSI domain bit late
> on this platform so that it somehow worked when we didn't set this flag.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't have system to root cause and fix this issue with
> confidence. Also, I don't know if any other architectures have similar
> issues which are not caught yet. Hence, I thought it may be better
> just restrict the change to RISC-V.
It sounds like the above is a good start on analyzing the problem.
I don't quite understand your statement that pcie_init_service_irqs()
doesn't fall back to INTx when MSI/MSI-X is not available.
I'm looking at this:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv.c?id=v6.8#n177
pcie_port_enable_irq_vec() attempts
pci_alloc_irq_vectors(PCI_IRQ_MSIX | PCI_IRQ_MSI) and returns 0 if
successful. If it returns failure, it looks like
pcie_init_service_irqs() *does* fall through to trying INTx
(PCI_IRQ_LEGACY).
Bjorn
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-16 20:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 96+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-15 17:00 [RFC PATCH v4 00/20] RISC-V: ACPI: Add external interrupt controller support Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` [RFC PATCH v4 01/20] arm64: PCI: Migrate ACPI related functions to pci-acpi.c Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` [RFC PATCH v4 02/20] RISC-V: ACPI: Implement PCI related functionality Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` [RFC PATCH v4 03/20] PCI: Make pci_create_root_bus() declare its reliance on MSI domains Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 23:15 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-04-15 23:15 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-04-15 23:15 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-04-16 8:24 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-16 8:24 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-16 8:24 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-16 20:46 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2024-04-16 20:46 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-04-16 20:46 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-04-17 15:33 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-17 15:33 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-17 15:33 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-18 11:45 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-18 11:45 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-18 11:45 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` [RFC PATCH v4 04/20] ACPI: scan.c: Add weak arch specific function to reorder the IRQCHIP probe Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` [RFC PATCH v4 05/20] ACPI: RISC-V: Implement arch function to reorder irqchip probe entries Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` [RFC PATCH v4 06/20] ACPI: bus: Add acpi_riscv_init function Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:00 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 07/20] RISC-V: Kconfig: Select deferred GSI probe for ACPI systems Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 08/20] ACPI: scan: Refactor dependency creation Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 09/20] drivers/acpi/scan.c: Update _DEP honor list Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 10/20] RISC-V: ACPI: Initialize GSI mapping structures Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 11/20] ACPI: scan.c: Define weak function to populate dependencies Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 12/20] RISC-V: ACPI: Implement function to add implicit dependencies Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 13/20] ACPI/PNP: Initialize PNP devices skipped due to _DEP Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 14/20] irqchip: riscv-intc: Add ACPI support for AIA Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 15/20] irqchip: riscv-imsic: Add ACPI support Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 16/20] irqchip: riscv-aplic: " Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 17/20] irqchip: irq-sifive-plic: " Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 18/20] ACPI: bus: Add RINTC IRQ model for RISC-V Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 19/20] irqchip: riscv-intc: Set ACPI irqmodel Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 20/20] ACPI: pci_link: Clear the dependencies after probe Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-15 17:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-18 13:49 ` [RFC PATCH v4 00/20] RISC-V: ACPI: Add external interrupt controller support Björn Töpel
2024-04-18 13:49 ` Björn Töpel
2024-04-18 13:49 ` Björn Töpel
2024-04-18 13:58 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-18 13:58 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-18 13:58 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-18 14:20 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2024-04-18 14:20 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2024-04-18 14:20 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2024-04-22 19:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-04-22 19:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-04-22 19:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-04-24 17:55 ` Björn Töpel
2024-04-24 17:55 ` Björn Töpel
2024-04-24 17:55 ` Björn Töpel
2024-04-29 6:41 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-29 6:41 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-29 6:41 ` Sunil V L
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=20240416204653.GA164172@bhelgaas \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=acpica-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ajones@ventanamicro.com \
--cc=andrei.warkentin@intel.com \
--cc=anup@brainfault.org \
--cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
--cc=atishp@rivosinc.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=bjorn@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=conor.dooley@microchip.com \
--cc=haibo1.xu@intel.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=robert.moore@intel.com \
--cc=samuel.holland@sifive.com \
--cc=sunilvl@ventanamicro.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will@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.