All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yongpeng Yang <monty_pavel@sina.com>
To: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
Cc: Yongpeng Yang <yangyongpeng@xiaomi.com>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix node_cnt race between extent node destroy and writeback
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2026 16:44:47 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <252cb446-e313-417b-b780-85dcdcf34a87@sina.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bedd1951-681b-4364-80c9-c7fe6886c992@kernel.org>


On 4/20/26 15:28, Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:
> On 4/19/2026 12:29 AM, Yongpeng Yang wrote:
>>
>> On 4/18/26 8:51 AM, Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:
>>> On 4/17/26 21:26, Yongpeng Yang wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 4/17/26 17:00, Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:
>>>>> On 4/3/26 22:40, Yongpeng Yang wrote:
>>>>>> From: Yongpeng Yang <yangyongpeng@xiaomi.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> f2fs_destroy_extent_node() does not set FI_NO_EXTENT before clearing
>>>>>> extent nodes. When called from f2fs_drop_inode() with I_SYNC set,
>>>>>> concurrent kworker writeback can insert new extent nodes into the
>>>>>> same
>>>>>> extent tree, racing with the destroy and triggering f2fs_bug_on() in
>>>>>> __destroy_extent_node(). The scenario is as follows:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> drop inode                            writeback
>>>>>>     - iput
>>>>>>      - f2fs_drop_inode  // I_SYNC set
>>>>>>       - f2fs_destroy_extent_node
>>>>>>        - __destroy_extent_node
>>>>>>         - while (node_cnt) {
>>>>>>            write_lock(&et->lock)
>>>>>>            __free_extent_tree
>>>>>>            write_unlock(&et->lock)
>>>>>>                                           - __writeback_single_inode
>>>>>>                                            - f2fs_outplace_write_data
>>>>>>                                             -
>>>>>> f2fs_update_read_extent_cache
>>>>>>                                              -
>>>>>> __update_extent_tree_range
>>>>>>                                               // FI_NO_EXTENT not
>>>>>> set,
>>>>>>                                               // insert new extent
>>>>>> node
>>>>>>           } // node_cnt == 0, exit while
>>>>>>         - f2fs_bug_on(node_cnt)  // node_cnt > 0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Additionally, __update_extent_tree_range() only checks
>>>>>> FI_NO_EXTENT for
>>>>>> EX_READ type, leaving EX_BLOCK_AGE updates completely unprotected.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patch set FI_NO_EXTENT under et->lock in
>>>>>> __destroy_extent_node(),
>>>>>> consistent with other callers (__update_extent_tree_range and
>>>>>> __drop_extent_tree) and check FI_NO_EXTENT for both EX_READ and
>>>>>> EX_BLOCK_AGE tree.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suffered below test failure, then I bisect to this change.
>>>>>
>>>>>       generic/475  84s ... [failed, exit status 1]- output mismatch
>>>>> (see /
>>>>> share/git/fstests/results//generic/475.out.bad)
>>>>>       --- tests/generic/475.out   2025-01-12 21:57:40.279440664 +0800
>>>>>       +++ /share/git/fstests/results//generic/475.out.bad 2026-04-17
>>>>> 12:08:28.000000000 +0800
>>>>>       @@ -1,2 +1,6 @@
>>>>>        QA output created by 475
>>>>>        Silence is golden.
>>>>>       +mount: /mnt/scratch_f2fs: mount system call failed: Structure
>>>>> needs
>>>>> cleaning.
>>>>>       +       dmesg(1) may have more information after failed mount
>>>>> system
>>>>> call.
>>>>>       +mount failed
>>>>>       +(see /share/git/fstests/results//generic/475.full for details)
>>>>>       ...
>>>>>       (Run 'diff -u /share/git/fstests/tests/generic/475.out /
>>>>> share/git/
>>>>> fstests/results//generic/475.out.bad'  to see the entire diff)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>       generic/388  73s ... [failed, exit status 1]- output mismatch
>>>>> (see /
>>>>> share/git/fstests/results//generic/388.out.bad)
>>>>>       --- tests/generic/388.out   2025-01-12 21:57:40.275440602 +0800
>>>>>       +++ /share/git/fstests/results//generic/388.out.bad 2026-04-17
>>>>> 11:58:05.000000000 +0800
>>>>>       @@ -1,2 +1,6 @@
>>>>>        QA output created by 388
>>>>>        Silence is golden.
>>>>>       +mount: /mnt/scratch_f2fs: mount system call failed: Structure
>>>>> needs
>>>>> cleaning.
>>>>>       +       dmesg(1) may have more information after failed mount
>>>>> system
>>>>> call.
>>>>>       +cycle mount failed
>>>>>       +(see /share/git/fstests/results//generic/388.full for details)
>>>>>       ...
>>>>>       (Run 'diff -u /share/git/fstests/tests/generic/388.out /
>>>>> share/git/
>>>>> fstests/results//generic/388.out.bad'  to see the entire diff)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>       F2FS-fs (dm-0): sanity_check_extent_cache: inode (ino=1761)
>>>>> extent
>>>>> info [220057, 57, 6] is incorrect, run fsck to fix
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect we may miss any extent updates after we set FI_NO_EXTENT in
>>>>> __destroy_extent_node(), result in failing in
>>>>> sanity_check_extent_cache().
>>>>>
>>>>> Can we just relocate f2fs_bug_on(node_cnt) rather than complicated
>>>>> change?
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Oh, I overlooked largest extent. How about relocate
>>>> f2fs_bug_on(node_cnt) to __destroy_extent_tree?
>>>>
>>>> static void __destroy_extent_tree(struct inode *inode, enum extent_type
>>>> type)
>>>>
>>>>           /* free all extent info belong to this extent tree */
>>>>           node_cnt = __destroy_extent_node(inode, type);
>>>> +       f2fs_bug_on(sbi, atomic_read(&et->node_cnt));
>>>
>>>       /* free all extent info belong to this extent tree */
>>>       node_cnt = __destroy_extent_node(inode, type);
>>>
>>>       /* delete extent tree entry in radix tree */
>>>       mutex_lock(&eti->extent_tree_lock);
>>>       f2fs_bug_on(sbi, atomic_read(&et->node_cnt));  <---
>>>
>>> Oh, it has already checked node_cnt, so, maybe we can just remove the
>>> check in
>>> __destroy_extent_node()?
>>
>> Yes. BTW, is it correct to remove the call to f2fs_destroy_extent_node()
>> in f2fs_drop_inode()? It seems this call is unnecessary, since
>> f2fs_evict_inode() will eventually delete all extent nodes properly.
> 
> I think it's fine to keep it according to original intention "destroy
> extent_tree for the truncation case" introduced from 3e72f721390d
> ("f2fs: use extent_cache by default"). It helps the performance w/
> in batch extent node release.

Oh, I see. This patch has already been merged into the dev branch. Which
of the following approaches would be more appropriate?
1. Drop the current patch from the dev branch, then submit a patch to
remove the f2fs_bug_on() in __destroy_extent_node.
2. Send two patches: the first reverts the change, and the second
removes the f2fs_bug_on() in __destroy_extent_node().

Thanks
Yongpeng,

> 
> Thanks,
> 
>>
>> Thanks
>> Yongpeng,
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Yongpeng,
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: 3fc5d5a182f6 ("f2fs: fix to shrink read extent node in
>>>>>> batches")
>>>>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yongpeng Yang <yangyongpeng@xiaomi.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c | 17 ++++++++++-------
>>>>>>     1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c b/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
>>>>>> index 0ed84cc065a7..87169fd29d89 100644
>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
>>>>>> @@ -119,9 +119,10 @@ static bool __may_extent_tree(struct inode
>>>>>> *inode, enum extent_type type)
>>>>>>         if (!__init_may_extent_tree(inode, type))
>>>>>>             return false;
>>>>>>     +    if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT))
>>>>>> +        return false;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>         if (type == EX_READ) {
>>>>>> -        if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT))
>>>>>> -            return false;
>>>>>>             if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_COMPRESSED_FILE) &&
>>>>>>                      !f2fs_sb_has_readonly(F2FS_I_SB(inode)))
>>>>>>                 return false;
>>>>>> @@ -644,6 +645,8 @@ static unsigned int __destroy_extent_node(struct
>>>>>> inode *inode,
>>>>>>           while (atomic_read(&et->node_cnt)) {
>>>>>>             write_lock(&et->lock);
>>>>>> +        if (!is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT))
>>>>>> +            set_inode_flag(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT);
>>>>>>             node_cnt += __free_extent_tree(sbi, et, nr_shrink);
>>>>>>             write_unlock(&et->lock);
>>>>>>         }
>>>>>> @@ -688,12 +691,12 @@ static void __update_extent_tree_range(struct
>>>>>> inode *inode,
>>>>>>           write_lock(&et->lock);
>>>>>>     -    if (type == EX_READ) {
>>>>>> -        if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT)) {
>>>>>> -            write_unlock(&et->lock);
>>>>>> -            return;
>>>>>> -        }
>>>>>> +    if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT)) {
>>>>>> +        write_unlock(&et->lock);
>>>>>> +        return;
>>>>>> +    }
>>>>>>     +    if (type == EX_READ) {
>>>>>>             prev = et->largest;
>>>>>>             dei.len = 0;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>



_______________________________________________
Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Yongpeng Yang <monty_pavel@sina.com>
To: Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>, Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
Cc: Yongpeng Yang <yangyongpeng@xiaomi.com>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix node_cnt race between extent node destroy and writeback
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2026 16:44:47 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <252cb446-e313-417b-b780-85dcdcf34a87@sina.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bedd1951-681b-4364-80c9-c7fe6886c992@kernel.org>


On 4/20/26 15:28, Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:
> On 4/19/2026 12:29 AM, Yongpeng Yang wrote:
>>
>> On 4/18/26 8:51 AM, Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:
>>> On 4/17/26 21:26, Yongpeng Yang wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 4/17/26 17:00, Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel wrote:
>>>>> On 4/3/26 22:40, Yongpeng Yang wrote:
>>>>>> From: Yongpeng Yang <yangyongpeng@xiaomi.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> f2fs_destroy_extent_node() does not set FI_NO_EXTENT before clearing
>>>>>> extent nodes. When called from f2fs_drop_inode() with I_SYNC set,
>>>>>> concurrent kworker writeback can insert new extent nodes into the
>>>>>> same
>>>>>> extent tree, racing with the destroy and triggering f2fs_bug_on() in
>>>>>> __destroy_extent_node(). The scenario is as follows:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> drop inode                            writeback
>>>>>>     - iput
>>>>>>      - f2fs_drop_inode  // I_SYNC set
>>>>>>       - f2fs_destroy_extent_node
>>>>>>        - __destroy_extent_node
>>>>>>         - while (node_cnt) {
>>>>>>            write_lock(&et->lock)
>>>>>>            __free_extent_tree
>>>>>>            write_unlock(&et->lock)
>>>>>>                                           - __writeback_single_inode
>>>>>>                                            - f2fs_outplace_write_data
>>>>>>                                             -
>>>>>> f2fs_update_read_extent_cache
>>>>>>                                              -
>>>>>> __update_extent_tree_range
>>>>>>                                               // FI_NO_EXTENT not
>>>>>> set,
>>>>>>                                               // insert new extent
>>>>>> node
>>>>>>           } // node_cnt == 0, exit while
>>>>>>         - f2fs_bug_on(node_cnt)  // node_cnt > 0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Additionally, __update_extent_tree_range() only checks
>>>>>> FI_NO_EXTENT for
>>>>>> EX_READ type, leaving EX_BLOCK_AGE updates completely unprotected.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patch set FI_NO_EXTENT under et->lock in
>>>>>> __destroy_extent_node(),
>>>>>> consistent with other callers (__update_extent_tree_range and
>>>>>> __drop_extent_tree) and check FI_NO_EXTENT for both EX_READ and
>>>>>> EX_BLOCK_AGE tree.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suffered below test failure, then I bisect to this change.
>>>>>
>>>>>       generic/475  84s ... [failed, exit status 1]- output mismatch
>>>>> (see /
>>>>> share/git/fstests/results//generic/475.out.bad)
>>>>>       --- tests/generic/475.out   2025-01-12 21:57:40.279440664 +0800
>>>>>       +++ /share/git/fstests/results//generic/475.out.bad 2026-04-17
>>>>> 12:08:28.000000000 +0800
>>>>>       @@ -1,2 +1,6 @@
>>>>>        QA output created by 475
>>>>>        Silence is golden.
>>>>>       +mount: /mnt/scratch_f2fs: mount system call failed: Structure
>>>>> needs
>>>>> cleaning.
>>>>>       +       dmesg(1) may have more information after failed mount
>>>>> system
>>>>> call.
>>>>>       +mount failed
>>>>>       +(see /share/git/fstests/results//generic/475.full for details)
>>>>>       ...
>>>>>       (Run 'diff -u /share/git/fstests/tests/generic/475.out /
>>>>> share/git/
>>>>> fstests/results//generic/475.out.bad'  to see the entire diff)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>       generic/388  73s ... [failed, exit status 1]- output mismatch
>>>>> (see /
>>>>> share/git/fstests/results//generic/388.out.bad)
>>>>>       --- tests/generic/388.out   2025-01-12 21:57:40.275440602 +0800
>>>>>       +++ /share/git/fstests/results//generic/388.out.bad 2026-04-17
>>>>> 11:58:05.000000000 +0800
>>>>>       @@ -1,2 +1,6 @@
>>>>>        QA output created by 388
>>>>>        Silence is golden.
>>>>>       +mount: /mnt/scratch_f2fs: mount system call failed: Structure
>>>>> needs
>>>>> cleaning.
>>>>>       +       dmesg(1) may have more information after failed mount
>>>>> system
>>>>> call.
>>>>>       +cycle mount failed
>>>>>       +(see /share/git/fstests/results//generic/388.full for details)
>>>>>       ...
>>>>>       (Run 'diff -u /share/git/fstests/tests/generic/388.out /
>>>>> share/git/
>>>>> fstests/results//generic/388.out.bad'  to see the entire diff)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>       F2FS-fs (dm-0): sanity_check_extent_cache: inode (ino=1761)
>>>>> extent
>>>>> info [220057, 57, 6] is incorrect, run fsck to fix
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect we may miss any extent updates after we set FI_NO_EXTENT in
>>>>> __destroy_extent_node(), result in failing in
>>>>> sanity_check_extent_cache().
>>>>>
>>>>> Can we just relocate f2fs_bug_on(node_cnt) rather than complicated
>>>>> change?
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Oh, I overlooked largest extent. How about relocate
>>>> f2fs_bug_on(node_cnt) to __destroy_extent_tree?
>>>>
>>>> static void __destroy_extent_tree(struct inode *inode, enum extent_type
>>>> type)
>>>>
>>>>           /* free all extent info belong to this extent tree */
>>>>           node_cnt = __destroy_extent_node(inode, type);
>>>> +       f2fs_bug_on(sbi, atomic_read(&et->node_cnt));
>>>
>>>       /* free all extent info belong to this extent tree */
>>>       node_cnt = __destroy_extent_node(inode, type);
>>>
>>>       /* delete extent tree entry in radix tree */
>>>       mutex_lock(&eti->extent_tree_lock);
>>>       f2fs_bug_on(sbi, atomic_read(&et->node_cnt));  <---
>>>
>>> Oh, it has already checked node_cnt, so, maybe we can just remove the
>>> check in
>>> __destroy_extent_node()?
>>
>> Yes. BTW, is it correct to remove the call to f2fs_destroy_extent_node()
>> in f2fs_drop_inode()? It seems this call is unnecessary, since
>> f2fs_evict_inode() will eventually delete all extent nodes properly.
> 
> I think it's fine to keep it according to original intention "destroy
> extent_tree for the truncation case" introduced from 3e72f721390d
> ("f2fs: use extent_cache by default"). It helps the performance w/
> in batch extent node release.

Oh, I see. This patch has already been merged into the dev branch. Which
of the following approaches would be more appropriate?
1. Drop the current patch from the dev branch, then submit a patch to
remove the f2fs_bug_on() in __destroy_extent_node.
2. Send two patches: the first reverts the change, and the second
removes the f2fs_bug_on() in __destroy_extent_node().

Thanks
Yongpeng,

> 
> Thanks,
> 
>>
>> Thanks
>> Yongpeng,
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Yongpeng,
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: 3fc5d5a182f6 ("f2fs: fix to shrink read extent node in
>>>>>> batches")
>>>>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yongpeng Yang <yangyongpeng@xiaomi.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c | 17 ++++++++++-------
>>>>>>     1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c b/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
>>>>>> index 0ed84cc065a7..87169fd29d89 100644
>>>>>> --- a/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
>>>>>> +++ b/fs/f2fs/extent_cache.c
>>>>>> @@ -119,9 +119,10 @@ static bool __may_extent_tree(struct inode
>>>>>> *inode, enum extent_type type)
>>>>>>         if (!__init_may_extent_tree(inode, type))
>>>>>>             return false;
>>>>>>     +    if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT))
>>>>>> +        return false;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>         if (type == EX_READ) {
>>>>>> -        if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT))
>>>>>> -            return false;
>>>>>>             if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_COMPRESSED_FILE) &&
>>>>>>                      !f2fs_sb_has_readonly(F2FS_I_SB(inode)))
>>>>>>                 return false;
>>>>>> @@ -644,6 +645,8 @@ static unsigned int __destroy_extent_node(struct
>>>>>> inode *inode,
>>>>>>           while (atomic_read(&et->node_cnt)) {
>>>>>>             write_lock(&et->lock);
>>>>>> +        if (!is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT))
>>>>>> +            set_inode_flag(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT);
>>>>>>             node_cnt += __free_extent_tree(sbi, et, nr_shrink);
>>>>>>             write_unlock(&et->lock);
>>>>>>         }
>>>>>> @@ -688,12 +691,12 @@ static void __update_extent_tree_range(struct
>>>>>> inode *inode,
>>>>>>           write_lock(&et->lock);
>>>>>>     -    if (type == EX_READ) {
>>>>>> -        if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT)) {
>>>>>> -            write_unlock(&et->lock);
>>>>>> -            return;
>>>>>> -        }
>>>>>> +    if (is_inode_flag_set(inode, FI_NO_EXTENT)) {
>>>>>> +        write_unlock(&et->lock);
>>>>>> +        return;
>>>>>> +    }
>>>>>>     +    if (type == EX_READ) {
>>>>>>             prev = et->largest;
>>>>>>             dei.len = 0;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>


  reply	other threads:[~2026-04-21  8:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-03 14:40 [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] f2fs: fix node_cnt race between extent node destroy and writeback Yongpeng Yang
2026-04-03 14:40 ` Yongpeng Yang
2026-04-13 11:23 ` [f2fs-dev] " Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel
2026-04-13 11:23   ` Chao Yu
2026-04-15 16:50 ` [f2fs-dev] " patchwork-bot+f2fs--- via Linux-f2fs-devel
2026-04-15 16:50   ` patchwork-bot+f2fs
2026-04-17  9:00 ` Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel
2026-04-17  9:00   ` Chao Yu
2026-04-17 13:26   ` [f2fs-dev] " Yongpeng Yang
2026-04-17 13:26     ` Yongpeng Yang
2026-04-18  0:51     ` Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel
2026-04-18  0:51       ` Chao Yu
2026-04-18 16:29       ` Yongpeng Yang
2026-04-18 16:29         ` Yongpeng Yang
2026-04-20  7:28         ` Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel
2026-04-20  7:28           ` Chao Yu
2026-04-21  8:44           ` Yongpeng Yang [this message]
2026-04-21  8:44             ` Yongpeng Yang
2026-04-21  9:04             ` Chao Yu via Linux-f2fs-devel
2026-04-21  9:04               ` Chao Yu
2026-04-21 21:52               ` Jaegeuk Kim via Linux-f2fs-devel
2026-04-21 21:52                 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2026-04-22  7:01                 ` Yongpeng Yang
2026-04-22  7:01                   ` Yongpeng Yang

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=252cb446-e313-417b-b780-85dcdcf34a87@sina.com \
    --to=monty_pavel@sina.com \
    --cc=chao@kernel.org \
    --cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yangyongpeng@xiaomi.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.