All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
To: elver@google.com
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
	Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
	 Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
	Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
	 Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,  Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
	Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
	 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
	 Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
	Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,  Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
	 Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
	Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
	 Neeraj Upadhyay <neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org>,
	Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
	Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,  Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	 llvm@lists.linux.dev, rcu@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH RFC 15/24] rcu: Support Clang's capability analysis
Date: Thu,  6 Feb 2025 19:10:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250206181711.1902989-16-elver@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250206181711.1902989-1-elver@google.com>

Improve the existing annotations to properly support Clang's capability
analysis.

The old annotations distinguished between RCU, RCU_BH, and RCU_SCHED.
However, it does not make sense to acquire rcu_read_lock_bh() after
rcu_read_lock() - annotate the _bh() and _sched() variants to also
acquire 'RCU', so that Clang (and also Sparse) can warn about it.

The above change also simplified introducing annotations, where it would
not matter if RCU, RCU_BH, or RCU_SCHED is acquired: through the
introduction of __rcu_guarded, we can use Clang's capability analysis to
warn if a pointer is dereferenced without any of the RCU locks held, or
updated without the appropriate helpers.

The primitives rcu_assign_pointer() and friends are wrapped with
capability_unsafe(), which enforces using them to update RCU-protected
pointers marked with __rcu_guarded.

Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
---
 .../dev-tools/capability-analysis.rst         |  2 +-
 include/linux/cleanup.h                       |  4 +
 include/linux/rcupdate.h                      | 73 +++++++++++++------
 lib/test_capability-analysis.c                | 68 +++++++++++++++++
 4 files changed, 123 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/capability-analysis.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/capability-analysis.rst
index a34dfe7b0b09..73dd28a23b11 100644
--- a/Documentation/dev-tools/capability-analysis.rst
+++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/capability-analysis.rst
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ Supported Kernel Primitives
 
 Currently the following synchronization primitives are supported:
 `raw_spinlock_t`, `spinlock_t`, `rwlock_t`, `mutex`, `seqlock_t`,
-`bit_spinlock`.
+`bit_spinlock`, RCU.
 
 For capabilities with an initialization function (e.g., `spin_lock_init()`),
 calling this function on the capability instance before initializing any
diff --git a/include/linux/cleanup.h b/include/linux/cleanup.h
index 93a166549add..7d70d308357a 100644
--- a/include/linux/cleanup.h
+++ b/include/linux/cleanup.h
@@ -404,6 +404,10 @@ static inline class_##_name##_t class_##_name##_constructor(void)	\
 	return _t;							\
 }
 
+#define DECLARE_LOCK_GUARD_0_ATTRS(_name, _lock, _unlock)		\
+static inline class_##_name##_t class_##_name##_constructor(void) _lock;\
+static inline void class_##_name##_destructor(class_##_name##_t *_T) _unlock
+
 #define DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(_name, _type, _lock, _unlock, ...)		\
 __DEFINE_CLASS_IS_CONDITIONAL(_name, false);				\
 __DEFINE_UNLOCK_GUARD(_name, _type, _unlock, __VA_ARGS__)		\
diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index 48e5c03df1dd..ee68095ba9f0 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -31,6 +31,16 @@
 #include <asm/processor.h>
 #include <linux/context_tracking_irq.h>
 
+token_capability(RCU);
+token_capability_instance(RCU, RCU_SCHED);
+token_capability_instance(RCU, RCU_BH);
+
+/*
+ * A convenience macro that can be used for RCU-protected globals or struct
+ * members; adds type qualifier __rcu, and also enforces __var_guarded_by(RCU).
+ */
+#define __rcu_guarded __rcu __var_guarded_by(RCU)
+
 #define ULONG_CMP_GE(a, b)	(ULONG_MAX / 2 >= (a) - (b))
 #define ULONG_CMP_LT(a, b)	(ULONG_MAX / 2 < (a) - (b))
 
@@ -431,7 +441,8 @@ static inline void rcu_preempt_sleep_check(void) { }
 
 // See RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN() for an explanation of the double call to
 // debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled().
-static inline bool lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(bool c)
+static inline bool lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(bool c, const struct __capability_RCU *cap)
+	__asserts_shared_cap(RCU) __asserts_shared_cap(cap)
 {
 	return debug_lockdep_rcu_enabled() &&
 	       (c || !rcu_is_watching() || !rcu_lockdep_current_cpu_online()) &&
@@ -444,7 +455,7 @@ static inline bool lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(bool c)
  * Splats if lockdep is enabled and there is no rcu_read_lock() in effect.
  */
 #define lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock() \
-	WARN_ON_ONCE(lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(!lock_is_held(&rcu_lock_map)))
+	WARN_ON_ONCE(lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(!lock_is_held(&rcu_lock_map), RCU))
 
 /**
  * lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock_bh - WARN if not protected by rcu_read_lock_bh()
@@ -454,7 +465,7 @@ static inline bool lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(bool c)
  * actual rcu_read_lock_bh() is required.
  */
 #define lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock_bh() \
-	WARN_ON_ONCE(lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(!lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map)))
+	WARN_ON_ONCE(lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(!lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map), RCU_BH))
 
 /**
  * lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock_sched - WARN if not protected by rcu_read_lock_sched()
@@ -464,7 +475,7 @@ static inline bool lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(bool c)
  * instead an actual rcu_read_lock_sched() is required.
  */
 #define lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock_sched() \
-	WARN_ON_ONCE(lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(!lock_is_held(&rcu_sched_lock_map)))
+	WARN_ON_ONCE(lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(!lock_is_held(&rcu_sched_lock_map), RCU_SCHED))
 
 /**
  * lockdep_assert_in_rcu_reader - WARN if not within some type of RCU reader
@@ -482,17 +493,17 @@ static inline bool lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(bool c)
 	WARN_ON_ONCE(lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(!lock_is_held(&rcu_lock_map) &&			\
 					       !lock_is_held(&rcu_bh_lock_map) &&		\
 					       !lock_is_held(&rcu_sched_lock_map) &&		\
-					       preemptible()))
+					       preemptible(), RCU))
 
 #else /* #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU */
 
 #define RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(c, s) do { } while (0 && (c))
 #define rcu_sleep_check() do { } while (0)
 
-#define lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock() do { } while (0)
-#define lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock_bh() do { } while (0)
-#define lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock_sched() do { } while (0)
-#define lockdep_assert_in_rcu_reader() do { } while (0)
+#define lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock() __assert_shared_cap(RCU)
+#define lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock_bh() __assert_shared_cap(RCU_BH)
+#define lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock_sched() __assert_shared_cap(RCU_SCHED)
+#define lockdep_assert_in_rcu_reader() __assert_shared_cap(RCU)
 
 #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_PROVE_RCU */
 
@@ -512,11 +523,11 @@ static inline bool lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(bool c)
 #endif /* #else #ifdef __CHECKER__ */
 
 #define __unrcu_pointer(p, local)					\
-({									\
+capability_unsafe(							\
 	typeof(*p) *local = (typeof(*p) *__force)(p);			\
 	rcu_check_sparse(p, __rcu);					\
 	((typeof(*p) __force __kernel *)(local)); 			\
-})
+)
 /**
  * unrcu_pointer - mark a pointer as not being RCU protected
  * @p: pointer needing to lose its __rcu property
@@ -592,7 +603,7 @@ static inline bool lockdep_assert_rcu_helper(bool c)
  * other macros that it invokes.
  */
 #define rcu_assign_pointer(p, v)					      \
-do {									      \
+capability_unsafe(							      \
 	uintptr_t _r_a_p__v = (uintptr_t)(v);				      \
 	rcu_check_sparse(p, __rcu);					      \
 									      \
@@ -600,7 +611,7 @@ do {									      \
 		WRITE_ONCE((p), (typeof(p))(_r_a_p__v));		      \
 	else								      \
 		smp_store_release(&p, RCU_INITIALIZER((typeof(p))_r_a_p__v)); \
-} while (0)
+)
 
 /**
  * rcu_replace_pointer() - replace an RCU pointer, returning its old value
@@ -843,9 +854,10 @@ do {									      \
  * only when acquiring spinlocks that are subject to priority inheritance.
  */
 static __always_inline void rcu_read_lock(void)
+	__acquires_shared(RCU)
 {
 	__rcu_read_lock();
-	__acquire(RCU);
+	__acquire_shared(RCU);
 	rcu_lock_acquire(&rcu_lock_map);
 	RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(!rcu_is_watching(),
 			 "rcu_read_lock() used illegally while idle");
@@ -874,11 +886,12 @@ static __always_inline void rcu_read_lock(void)
  * See rcu_read_lock() for more information.
  */
 static inline void rcu_read_unlock(void)
+	__releases_shared(RCU)
 {
 	RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(!rcu_is_watching(),
 			 "rcu_read_unlock() used illegally while idle");
 	rcu_lock_release(&rcu_lock_map); /* Keep acq info for rls diags. */
-	__release(RCU);
+	__release_shared(RCU);
 	__rcu_read_unlock();
 }
 
@@ -897,9 +910,11 @@ static inline void rcu_read_unlock(void)
  * was invoked from some other task.
  */
 static inline void rcu_read_lock_bh(void)
+	__acquires_shared(RCU) __acquires_shared(RCU_BH)
 {
 	local_bh_disable();
-	__acquire(RCU_BH);
+	__acquire_shared(RCU);
+	__acquire_shared(RCU_BH);
 	rcu_lock_acquire(&rcu_bh_lock_map);
 	RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(!rcu_is_watching(),
 			 "rcu_read_lock_bh() used illegally while idle");
@@ -911,11 +926,13 @@ static inline void rcu_read_lock_bh(void)
  * See rcu_read_lock_bh() for more information.
  */
 static inline void rcu_read_unlock_bh(void)
+	__releases_shared(RCU) __releases_shared(RCU_BH)
 {
 	RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(!rcu_is_watching(),
 			 "rcu_read_unlock_bh() used illegally while idle");
 	rcu_lock_release(&rcu_bh_lock_map);
-	__release(RCU_BH);
+	__release_shared(RCU_BH);
+	__release_shared(RCU);
 	local_bh_enable();
 }
 
@@ -935,9 +952,11 @@ static inline void rcu_read_unlock_bh(void)
  * rcu_read_lock_sched() was invoked from an NMI handler.
  */
 static inline void rcu_read_lock_sched(void)
+	__acquires_shared(RCU) __acquires_shared(RCU_SCHED)
 {
 	preempt_disable();
-	__acquire(RCU_SCHED);
+	__acquire_shared(RCU);
+	__acquire_shared(RCU_SCHED);
 	rcu_lock_acquire(&rcu_sched_lock_map);
 	RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(!rcu_is_watching(),
 			 "rcu_read_lock_sched() used illegally while idle");
@@ -945,9 +964,11 @@ static inline void rcu_read_lock_sched(void)
 
 /* Used by lockdep and tracing: cannot be traced, cannot call lockdep. */
 static inline notrace void rcu_read_lock_sched_notrace(void)
+	__acquires_shared(RCU) __acquires_shared(RCU_SCHED)
 {
 	preempt_disable_notrace();
-	__acquire(RCU_SCHED);
+	__acquire_shared(RCU);
+	__acquire_shared(RCU_SCHED);
 }
 
 /**
@@ -956,18 +977,22 @@ static inline notrace void rcu_read_lock_sched_notrace(void)
  * See rcu_read_lock_sched() for more information.
  */
 static inline void rcu_read_unlock_sched(void)
+	__releases_shared(RCU) __releases_shared(RCU_SCHED)
 {
 	RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(!rcu_is_watching(),
 			 "rcu_read_unlock_sched() used illegally while idle");
 	rcu_lock_release(&rcu_sched_lock_map);
-	__release(RCU_SCHED);
+	__release_shared(RCU_SCHED);
+	__release_shared(RCU);
 	preempt_enable();
 }
 
 /* Used by lockdep and tracing: cannot be traced, cannot call lockdep. */
 static inline notrace void rcu_read_unlock_sched_notrace(void)
+	__releases_shared(RCU) __releases_shared(RCU_SCHED)
 {
-	__release(RCU_SCHED);
+	__release_shared(RCU_SCHED);
+	__release_shared(RCU);
 	preempt_enable_notrace();
 }
 
@@ -1010,10 +1035,10 @@ static inline notrace void rcu_read_unlock_sched_notrace(void)
  * ordering guarantees for either the CPU or the compiler.
  */
 #define RCU_INIT_POINTER(p, v) \
-	do { \
+	capability_unsafe( \
 		rcu_check_sparse(p, __rcu); \
 		WRITE_ONCE(p, RCU_INITIALIZER(v)); \
-	} while (0)
+	)
 
 /**
  * RCU_POINTER_INITIALIZER() - statically initialize an RCU protected pointer
@@ -1172,4 +1197,6 @@ DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_0(rcu,
 	} while (0),
 	rcu_read_unlock())
 
+DECLARE_LOCK_GUARD_0_ATTRS(rcu, __acquires_shared(RCU), __releases_shared(RCU));
+
 #endif /* __LINUX_RCUPDATE_H */
diff --git a/lib/test_capability-analysis.c b/lib/test_capability-analysis.c
index fc8dcad2a994..f5a1dda6ca38 100644
--- a/lib/test_capability-analysis.c
+++ b/lib/test_capability-analysis.c
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
 #include <linux/bit_spinlock.h>
 #include <linux/build_bug.h>
 #include <linux/mutex.h>
+#include <linux/rcupdate.h>
 #include <linux/seqlock.h>
 #include <linux/spinlock.h>
 
@@ -277,3 +278,70 @@ static void __used test_bit_spin_lock(struct test_bit_spinlock_data *d)
 		bit_spin_unlock(3, &d->bits);
 	}
 }
+
+/*
+ * Test that we can mark a variable guarded by RCU, and we can dereference and
+ * write to the pointer with RCU's primitives.
+ */
+struct test_rcu_data {
+	long __rcu_guarded *data;
+};
+
+static void __used test_rcu_guarded_reader(struct test_rcu_data *d)
+{
+	rcu_read_lock();
+	(void)rcu_dereference(d->data);
+	rcu_read_unlock();
+
+	rcu_read_lock_bh();
+	(void)rcu_dereference(d->data);
+	rcu_read_unlock_bh();
+
+	rcu_read_lock_sched();
+	(void)rcu_dereference(d->data);
+	rcu_read_unlock_sched();
+}
+
+static void __used test_rcu_guard(struct test_rcu_data *d)
+{
+	guard(rcu)();
+	(void)rcu_dereference(d->data);
+}
+
+static void __used test_rcu_guarded_updater(struct test_rcu_data *d)
+{
+	rcu_assign_pointer(d->data, NULL);
+	RCU_INIT_POINTER(d->data, NULL);
+	(void)unrcu_pointer(d->data);
+}
+
+static void wants_rcu_held(void)	__must_hold_shared(RCU)       { }
+static void wants_rcu_held_bh(void)	__must_hold_shared(RCU_BH)    { }
+static void wants_rcu_held_sched(void)	__must_hold_shared(RCU_SCHED) { }
+
+static void __used test_rcu_lock_variants(void)
+{
+	rcu_read_lock();
+	wants_rcu_held();
+	rcu_read_unlock();
+
+	rcu_read_lock_bh();
+	wants_rcu_held_bh();
+	rcu_read_unlock_bh();
+
+	rcu_read_lock_sched();
+	wants_rcu_held_sched();
+	rcu_read_unlock_sched();
+}
+
+static void __used test_rcu_assert_variants(void)
+{
+	lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock();
+	wants_rcu_held();
+
+	lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock_bh();
+	wants_rcu_held_bh();
+
+	lockdep_assert_in_rcu_read_lock_sched();
+	wants_rcu_held_sched();
+}
-- 
2.48.1.502.g6dc24dfdaf-goog


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-02-06 18:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-02-06 18:09 [PATCH RFC 00/24] Compiler-Based Capability- and Locking-Analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:09 ` [PATCH RFC 01/24] compiler_types: Move lock checking attributes to compiler-capability-analysis.h Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:40   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-02-06 18:48     ` Marco Elver
2025-02-07  8:33       ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-06 18:09 ` [PATCH RFC 02/24] compiler-capability-analysis: Rename __cond_lock() to __cond_acquire() Marco Elver
2025-02-07  8:28   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-07  9:32     ` Marco Elver
2025-02-07  9:41       ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-07  9:50         ` Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:09 ` [PATCH RFC 03/24] compiler-capability-analysis: Add infrastructure for Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:09 ` [PATCH RFC 04/24] compiler-capability-analysis: Add test stub Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:09 ` [PATCH RFC 05/24] Documentation: Add documentation for Compiler-Based Capability Analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 06/24] checkpatch: Warn about capability_unsafe() without comment Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 07/24] cleanup: Basic compatibility with capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 21:29   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-02-06 22:01     ` Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 08/24] lockdep: Annotate lockdep assertions for " Marco Elver
2025-02-10 18:09   ` Bart Van Assche
2025-02-10 18:23     ` Marco Elver
2025-02-10 18:53       ` Bart Van Assche
2025-02-11 13:55         ` Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 09/24] locking/rwlock, spinlock: Support Clang's " Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 10/24] compiler-capability-analysis: Change __cond_acquires to take return value Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 11/24] locking/mutex: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-07  8:31   ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-07 20:58     ` Bart Van Assche
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 12/24] locking/seqlock: " Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 13/24] bit_spinlock: Include missing <asm/processor.h> Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 14/24] bit_spinlock: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` Marco Elver [this message]
2025-02-20 22:00   ` [PATCH RFC 15/24] rcu: " Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-20 22:11     ` Marco Elver
2025-02-20 22:36       ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-21  0:16         ` Marco Elver
2025-02-21  1:26           ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-21 17:10             ` Marco Elver
2025-02-21 18:08               ` Paul E. McKenney
2025-02-21 18:52                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-21 19:46                   ` Marco Elver
2025-02-21 19:57                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 16/24] srcu: " Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 17/24] kref: Add capability-analysis annotations Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 18/24] locking/rwsem: Support Clang's capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 19/24] locking/local_lock: " Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 20/24] debugfs: Make debugfs_cancellation a capability struct Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 21/24] kfence: Enable capability analysis Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 22/24] kcov: " Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 23/24] stackdepot: " Marco Elver
2025-02-06 18:10 ` [PATCH RFC 24/24] rhashtable: " Marco Elver
2025-02-27  7:00 ` [PATCH RFC 00/24] Compiler-Based Capability- and Locking-Analysis Marco Elver

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=20250206181711.1902989-16-elver@google.com \
    --to=elver@google.com \
    --cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=glider@google.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
    --cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
    --cc=justinstitt@google.com \
    --cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=kees@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=longman@redhat.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=morbo@google.com \
    --cc=nathan@kernel.org \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=neeraj.upadhyay@kernel.org \
    --cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=urezki@gmail.com \
    --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.