From: Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@huawei.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
"loongarch@lists.linux.dev" <loongarch@lists.linux.dev>,
"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"kvmarm@lists.linux.dev" <kvmarm@lists.linux.dev>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
"Miguel Luis" <miguel.luis@oracle.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
"justin.he@arm.com" <justin.he@arm.com>,
"jianyong.wu@arm.com" <jianyong.wu@arm.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v6 04/16] ACPI: processor: Move checks and availability of acpi_processor earlier
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 15:08:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <32aaee486f984859af713138e460075f@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240417131909.7925-5-Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> From: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2024 2:19 PM
>
> Make the per_cpu(processors, cpu) entries available earlier so that they are
> available in arch_register_cpu() as ARM64 will need access to the
> acpi_handle to distinguish between acpi_processor_add() and earlier
> registration attempts (which will fail as _STA cannot be checked).
>
> Reorder the remove flow to clear this per_cpu() after
> arch_unregister_cpu() has completed, allowing it to be used in there as
> well.
>
> Note that on x86 for the CPU hotplug case, the pr->id prior to
> acpi_map_cpu() may be invalid. Thus the per_cpu() structures must be
> initialized after that call or after checking the ID is valid (not hotplug path).
>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> ---
> v6: As per discussion in v5 thread, don't use the cpu->dev and
> make this data available earlier by moving the assignment checks
> int acpi_processor_get_info().
> ---
> drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> index ba0a6f0ac841..2c164451ab53 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> @@ -184,7 +184,35 @@ static void __init acpi_pcc_cpufreq_init(void) {}
>
> /* Initialization */
> #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_CPU
> -static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(void *, processor_device_array);
> +
> +static void acpi_processor_set_per_cpu(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> + struct acpi_device *device)
> +{
> + BUG_ON(pr->id >= nr_cpu_ids);
> + /*
> + * Buggy BIOS check.
> + * ACPI id of processors can be reported wrongly by the BIOS.
> + * Don't trust it blindly
> + */
> + if (per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) != NULL &&
> + per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) != device) {
> + dev_warn(&device->dev,
> + "BIOS reported wrong ACPI id %d for the processor\n",
> + pr->id);
> + /* Give up, but do not abort the namespace scan. */
> + return;
> + }
> + /*
> + * processor_device_array is not cleared on errors to allow buggy BIOS
> + * checks.
> + */
> + per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) = device;
> + per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = pr;
> +}
> +
> +static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> + struct acpi_device *device)
> {
> int ret;
>
> @@ -198,6 +226,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct
> acpi_processor *pr)
> if (ret)
> goto out;
>
> + acpi_processor_set_per_cpu(pr, device);
> +
> ret = arch_register_cpu(pr->id);
> if (ret) {
> acpi_unmap_cpu(pr->id);
> @@ -217,7 +247,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct
> acpi_processor *pr)
> return ret;
> }
> #else
> -static inline int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> +static inline int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> + struct acpi_device *device)
> {
> return -ENODEV;
> }
> @@ -232,6 +263,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_device
> *device)
> acpi_status status = AE_OK;
> static int cpu0_initialized;
> unsigned long long value;
> + int ret;
>
> acpi_processor_errata();
>
> @@ -316,10 +348,12 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct
> acpi_device *device)
> * because cpuid <-> apicid mapping is persistent now.
> */
> if (invalid_logical_cpuid(pr->id) || !cpu_present(pr->id)) {
> - int ret = acpi_processor_hotadd_init(pr);
> + ret = acpi_processor_hotadd_init(pr, device);
>
> if (ret)
> - return ret;
> + goto err;
> + } else {
> + acpi_processor_set_per_cpu(pr, device);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -357,6 +391,10 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct
> acpi_device *device)
> arch_fix_phys_package_id(pr->id, value);
>
> return 0;
> +
> +err:
> + per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = NULL;
> + return ret;
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -365,8 +403,6 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_device
> *device)
> * (cpu_data(cpu)) values, like CPU feature flags, family, model, etc.
> * Such things have to be put in and set up by the processor driver's
> .probe().
> */
> -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(void *, processor_device_array);
> -
> static int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device,
> const struct acpi_device_id *id)
> {
> @@ -395,28 +431,6 @@ static int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device
> *device,
> if (result) /* Processor is not physically present or unavailable */
> return 0;
>
> - BUG_ON(pr->id >= nr_cpu_ids);
> -
> - /*
> - * Buggy BIOS check.
> - * ACPI id of processors can be reported wrongly by the BIOS.
> - * Don't trust it blindly
> - */
> - if (per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) != NULL &&
> - per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) != device) {
> - dev_warn(&device->dev,
> - "BIOS reported wrong ACPI id %d for the processor\n",
> - pr->id);
> - /* Give up, but do not abort the namespace scan. */
> - goto err;
> - }
> - /*
> - * processor_device_array is not cleared on errors to allow buggy BIOS
> - * checks.
> - */
> - per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) = device;
> - per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = pr;
> -
> dev = get_cpu_device(pr->id);
> if (!dev) {
> result = -ENODEV;
> @@ -469,15 +483,16 @@ static void acpi_processor_remove(struct
> acpi_device *device)
> device_release_driver(pr->dev);
> acpi_unbind_one(pr->dev);
>
> - /* Clean up. */
> - per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) = NULL;
> - per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = NULL;
> -
> cpu_maps_update_begin();
> cpus_write_lock();
>
> /* Remove the CPU. */
> arch_unregister_cpu(pr->id);
> +
> + /* Clean up. */
> + per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) = NULL;
> + per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = NULL;
> +
Shouldn't above change come after acpi_unmap_cpu() i.e. after next line?
> acpi_unmap_cpu(pr->id);
>
> cpus_write_unlock();
> --
> 2.39.2
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@huawei.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
"loongarch@lists.linux.dev" <loongarch@lists.linux.dev>,
"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"kvmarm@lists.linux.dev" <kvmarm@lists.linux.dev>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
"Miguel Luis" <miguel.luis@oracle.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
"justin.he@arm.com" <justin.he@arm.com>,
"jianyong.wu@arm.com" <jianyong.wu@arm.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v6 04/16] ACPI: processor: Move checks and availability of acpi_processor earlier
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 15:08:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <32aaee486f984859af713138e460075f@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240417131909.7925-5-Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> From: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2024 2:19 PM
>
> Make the per_cpu(processors, cpu) entries available earlier so that they are
> available in arch_register_cpu() as ARM64 will need access to the
> acpi_handle to distinguish between acpi_processor_add() and earlier
> registration attempts (which will fail as _STA cannot be checked).
>
> Reorder the remove flow to clear this per_cpu() after
> arch_unregister_cpu() has completed, allowing it to be used in there as
> well.
>
> Note that on x86 for the CPU hotplug case, the pr->id prior to
> acpi_map_cpu() may be invalid. Thus the per_cpu() structures must be
> initialized after that call or after checking the ID is valid (not hotplug path).
>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
> ---
> v6: As per discussion in v5 thread, don't use the cpu->dev and
> make this data available earlier by moving the assignment checks
> int acpi_processor_get_info().
> ---
> drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> index ba0a6f0ac841..2c164451ab53 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c
> @@ -184,7 +184,35 @@ static void __init acpi_pcc_cpufreq_init(void) {}
>
> /* Initialization */
> #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_CPU
> -static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(void *, processor_device_array);
> +
> +static void acpi_processor_set_per_cpu(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> + struct acpi_device *device)
> +{
> + BUG_ON(pr->id >= nr_cpu_ids);
> + /*
> + * Buggy BIOS check.
> + * ACPI id of processors can be reported wrongly by the BIOS.
> + * Don't trust it blindly
> + */
> + if (per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) != NULL &&
> + per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) != device) {
> + dev_warn(&device->dev,
> + "BIOS reported wrong ACPI id %d for the processor\n",
> + pr->id);
> + /* Give up, but do not abort the namespace scan. */
> + return;
> + }
> + /*
> + * processor_device_array is not cleared on errors to allow buggy BIOS
> + * checks.
> + */
> + per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) = device;
> + per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = pr;
> +}
> +
> +static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> + struct acpi_device *device)
> {
> int ret;
>
> @@ -198,6 +226,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct
> acpi_processor *pr)
> if (ret)
> goto out;
>
> + acpi_processor_set_per_cpu(pr, device);
> +
> ret = arch_register_cpu(pr->id);
> if (ret) {
> acpi_unmap_cpu(pr->id);
> @@ -217,7 +247,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct
> acpi_processor *pr)
> return ret;
> }
> #else
> -static inline int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr)
> +static inline int acpi_processor_hotadd_init(struct acpi_processor *pr,
> + struct acpi_device *device)
> {
> return -ENODEV;
> }
> @@ -232,6 +263,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_device
> *device)
> acpi_status status = AE_OK;
> static int cpu0_initialized;
> unsigned long long value;
> + int ret;
>
> acpi_processor_errata();
>
> @@ -316,10 +348,12 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct
> acpi_device *device)
> * because cpuid <-> apicid mapping is persistent now.
> */
> if (invalid_logical_cpuid(pr->id) || !cpu_present(pr->id)) {
> - int ret = acpi_processor_hotadd_init(pr);
> + ret = acpi_processor_hotadd_init(pr, device);
>
> if (ret)
> - return ret;
> + goto err;
> + } else {
> + acpi_processor_set_per_cpu(pr, device);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -357,6 +391,10 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct
> acpi_device *device)
> arch_fix_phys_package_id(pr->id, value);
>
> return 0;
> +
> +err:
> + per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = NULL;
> + return ret;
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -365,8 +403,6 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_info(struct acpi_device
> *device)
> * (cpu_data(cpu)) values, like CPU feature flags, family, model, etc.
> * Such things have to be put in and set up by the processor driver's
> .probe().
> */
> -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(void *, processor_device_array);
> -
> static int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device,
> const struct acpi_device_id *id)
> {
> @@ -395,28 +431,6 @@ static int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device
> *device,
> if (result) /* Processor is not physically present or unavailable */
> return 0;
>
> - BUG_ON(pr->id >= nr_cpu_ids);
> -
> - /*
> - * Buggy BIOS check.
> - * ACPI id of processors can be reported wrongly by the BIOS.
> - * Don't trust it blindly
> - */
> - if (per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) != NULL &&
> - per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) != device) {
> - dev_warn(&device->dev,
> - "BIOS reported wrong ACPI id %d for the processor\n",
> - pr->id);
> - /* Give up, but do not abort the namespace scan. */
> - goto err;
> - }
> - /*
> - * processor_device_array is not cleared on errors to allow buggy BIOS
> - * checks.
> - */
> - per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) = device;
> - per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = pr;
> -
> dev = get_cpu_device(pr->id);
> if (!dev) {
> result = -ENODEV;
> @@ -469,15 +483,16 @@ static void acpi_processor_remove(struct
> acpi_device *device)
> device_release_driver(pr->dev);
> acpi_unbind_one(pr->dev);
>
> - /* Clean up. */
> - per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) = NULL;
> - per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = NULL;
> -
> cpu_maps_update_begin();
> cpus_write_lock();
>
> /* Remove the CPU. */
> arch_unregister_cpu(pr->id);
> +
> + /* Clean up. */
> + per_cpu(processor_device_array, pr->id) = NULL;
> + per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = NULL;
> +
Shouldn't above change come after acpi_unmap_cpu() i.e. after next line?
> acpi_unmap_cpu(pr->id);
>
> cpus_write_unlock();
> --
> 2.39.2
_______________________________________________
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:[~2024-04-17 15:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-17 13:18 [PATCH v6 00/16] ACPI/arm64: add support for virtual cpu hotplug Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:18 ` [PATCH v6 01/16] ACPI: processor: Simplify initial onlining to use same path for cold and hotplug Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:18 ` [PATCH v6 02/16] cpu: Do not warn on arch_register_cpu() returning -EPROBE_DEFER Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 14:01 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-04-17 14:01 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-04-17 14:41 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 14:41 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:18 ` [PATCH v6 03/16] ACPI: processor: Drop duplicated check on _STA (enabled + present) Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:18 ` [PATCH v6 04/16] ACPI: processor: Move checks and availability of acpi_processor earlier Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 15:08 ` Salil Mehta [this message]
2024-04-17 15:08 ` Salil Mehta
2024-04-17 15:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 15:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-18 8:16 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-18 8:16 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:18 ` [PATCH v6 05/16] ACPI: processor: Add acpi_get_processor_handle() helper Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:18 ` [PATCH v6 06/16] ACPI: processor: Register deferred CPUs from acpi_processor_get_info() Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 15:03 ` Salil Mehta
2024-04-17 15:03 ` Salil Mehta
2024-04-17 15:38 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 15:38 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 15:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-04-17 15:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-04-17 17:09 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 17:09 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 17:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-04-17 17:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2024-04-17 18:57 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 18:57 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v6 07/16] ACPI: scan: switch to flags for acpi_scan_check_and_detach(); Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v6 08/16] ACPI: Add post_eject to struct acpi_scan_handler for cpu hotplug Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v6 09/16] arm64: acpi: Move get_cpu_for_acpi_id() to a header Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v6 10/16] irqchip/gic-v3: Don't return errors from gic_acpi_match_gicc() Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v6 11/16] irqchip/gic-v3: Add support for ACPI's disabled but 'online capable' CPUs Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v6 12/16] arm64: psci: Ignore DENIED CPUs Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v6 13/16] arm64: arch_register_cpu() variant to check if an ACPI handle is now available Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 16:33 ` Salil Mehta
2024-04-17 16:33 ` Salil Mehta
2024-04-17 16:55 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 16:55 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 17:03 ` Salil Mehta
2024-04-17 17:03 ` Salil Mehta
2024-04-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v6 14/16] arm64: Kconfig: Enable hotplug CPU on arm64 if ACPI_PROCESSOR is enabled Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v6 15/16] arm64: document virtual CPU hotplug's expectations Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` [PATCH v6 16/16] cpumask: Add enabled cpumask for present CPUs that can be brought online Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 13:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-17 17:01 ` Salil Mehta
2024-04-17 17:01 ` Salil Mehta
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=32aaee486f984859af713138e460075f@huawei.com \
--to=salil.mehta@huawei.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=jianyong.wu@arm.com \
--cc=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=justin.he@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=loongarch@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=miguel.luis@oracle.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@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.