From: Chen Gang <gang.chen-bOixZGp5f+dBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Linux-sh list <linux-sh-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt
<benh-XVmvHMARGAS8U2dJNN8I7kB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org>,
Heiko Carstens
<heiko.carstens-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
"paulus-eUNUBHrolfbYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org"
<paulus-eUNUBHrolfbYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
Michel Lespinasse
<walken-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Hans-Christian Egtvedt
<egtvedt-BrfabpQBY5qlHtIdYg32fQ@public.gmane.org>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
linux-s390-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org>,
Yoshinori Sato
<ysato-Rn4VEauK+AKRv+LV9MX5uooqe+aC9MnS@public.gmane.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard-/L3Ra7n9ekc@public.gmane.org>,
Helge Deller <deller-Mmb7MZpHnFY@public.gmane.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers
<x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
"James E.J. Bottomley"
<jejb-6jwH94ZQLHl74goWV3ctuw@public.gmane.org>,
"mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org"
<mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven
<geert-Td1EMuHUCqxL1ZNQvxDV9g@public.gmane.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fwe>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch: configuration, deleting 'CONFIG_BUG' since always need it.
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 19:19:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <519DFB42.7010509@asianux.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201305231259.43750.arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>
On 05/23/2013 06:59 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> You don't just want to avoid the code for printing the bug message and
> the invalid instruction, we also want the compiler to not emit the
> function call or check the enum for unexpected values. The meaning of
> BUG() is really that person writing that statement was sure it cannot
> happen unless there is a bug in the kernel, which has likely already
> corrupted data. Printing a diagnostic at this point is nice if someone
> is there to look at it, but letting the kernel do further actions that
> may be undefined is not going to make things worse.
So I think neither unreachable() nor panic() are suitable for this
condition.
I guess 'CONFIG_BUG' is not belong to common features, now (and in the
future), so it is not suitable still exist in "asm-generic/bug.h", need
remove it firstly.
And then let the specific architectures to implement their own BUG(), if
they want some special features.
SO most of arches can skip this issue.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Asianux Corporation
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Chen Gang <gang.chen-bOixZGp5f+dBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Linux-sh list <linux-sh-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt
<benh-XVmvHMARGAS8U2dJNN8I7kB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org>,
Heiko Carstens
<heiko.carstens-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
"paulus-eUNUBHrolfbYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org"
<paulus-eUNUBHrolfbYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
Michel Lespinasse
<walken-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Hans-Christian Egtvedt
<egtvedt-BrfabpQBY5qlHtIdYg32fQ@public.gmane.org>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
linux-s390-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org>,
Yoshinori Sato
<ysato-Rn4VEauK+AKRv+LV9MX5uooqe+aC9MnS@public.gmane.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard-/L3Ra7n9ekc@public.gmane.org>,
Helge Deller <deller-Mmb7MZpHnFY@public.gmane.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers
<x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
"James E.J. Bottomley"
<jejb-6jwH94ZQLHl74goWV3ctuw@public.gmane.org>,
"mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org"
<mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven
<geert-Td1EMuHUCqxL1ZNQvxDV9g@public.gmane.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fwe
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch: configuration, deleting 'CONFIG_BUG' since always need it.
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 19:19:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <519DFB42.7010509@asianux.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201305231259.43750.arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>
On 05/23/2013 06:59 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> You don't just want to avoid the code for printing the bug message and
> the invalid instruction, we also want the compiler to not emit the
> function call or check the enum for unexpected values. The meaning of
> BUG() is really that person writing that statement was sure it cannot
> happen unless there is a bug in the kernel, which has likely already
> corrupted data. Printing a diagnostic at this point is nice if someone
> is there to look at it, but letting the kernel do further actions that
> may be undefined is not going to make things worse.
So I think neither unreachable() nor panic() are suitable for this
condition.
I guess 'CONFIG_BUG' is not belong to common features, now (and in the
future), so it is not suitable still exist in "asm-generic/bug.h", need
remove it firstly.
And then let the specific architectures to implement their own BUG(), if
they want some special features.
SO most of arches can skip this issue.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Asianux Corporation
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: "Russell King - ARM Linux" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
"Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
"Håvard Skinnemoen" <hskinnemoen@gmail.com>,
"Hans-Christian Egtvedt" <egtvedt@samfundet.no>,
"Mike Frysinger" <vapier@gentoo.org>,
"Yoshinori Sato" <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
"Richard Kuo" <rkuo@codeaurora.org>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@parisc-linux.org>,
"Helge Deller" <deller@gmx.de>,
"Benjamin Herrenschmidt" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
"paulus@samba.org" <paulus@samba.org>,
"Martin Schwidefsky" <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
"Heiko Carstens" <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
linux390@de.ibm.com, "Paul Mundt" <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
"Jeff Dike" <jdike@addtoit.com>,
"Richard Weinberger" <richard@nod.at>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
"Serge Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>,
"Paul McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Frederic Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
"David Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Akinobu Mita" <akinobu.mita@gmail.com>,
"Catalin Marinas" <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
"Michel Lespinasse" <walken@google.com>,
"Will Deacon" <will.deacon@arm.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org"
<uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org>,
linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org,
"Parisc List" <linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
"Linux-sh list" <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
uml-devel <user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
uml-user <user-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch: configuration, deleting 'CONFIG_BUG' since always need it.
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 19:19:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <519DFB42.7010509@asianux.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201305231259.43750.arnd@arndb.de>
On 05/23/2013 06:59 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> You don't just want to avoid the code for printing the bug message and
> the invalid instruction, we also want the compiler to not emit the
> function call or check the enum for unexpected values. The meaning of
> BUG() is really that person writing that statement was sure it cannot
> happen unless there is a bug in the kernel, which has likely already
> corrupted data. Printing a diagnostic at this point is nice if someone
> is there to look at it, but letting the kernel do further actions that
> may be undefined is not going to make things worse.
So I think neither unreachable() nor panic() are suitable for this
condition.
I guess 'CONFIG_BUG' is not belong to common features, now (and in the
future), so it is not suitable still exist in "asm-generic/bug.h", need
remove it firstly.
And then let the specific architectures to implement their own BUG(), if
they want some special features.
SO most of arches can skip this issue.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Asianux Corporation
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: "Catalin Marinas" <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
"Linux-sh list" <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
"Heiko Carstens" <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
"paulus@samba.org" <paulus@samba.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Michel Lespinasse" <walken@google.com>,
"Hans-Christian Egtvedt" <egtvedt@samfundet.no>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
"Russell King - ARM Linux" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
"Yoshinori Sato" <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
"Richard Weinberger" <richard@nod.at>,
"Helge Deller" <deller@gmx.de>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@parisc-linux.org>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
"Frederic Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
"Paul McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Håvard Skinnemoen" <hskinnemoen@gmail.com>,
"Serge Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>,
"Mike Frysinger" <vapier@gentoo.org>,
uml-devel <user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
"Will Deacon" <will.deacon@arm.com>,
"Jeff Dike" <jdike@addtoit.com>,
"Akinobu Mita" <akinobu.mita@gmail.com>,
uml-user <user-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net>,
"uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org"
<uclinux-dist-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"Parisc List" <linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Richard Kuo" <rkuo@codeaurora.org>,
"Paul Mundt" <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org,
"Martin Schwidefsky" <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
linux390@de.ibm.com, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"David Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch: configuration, deleting 'CONFIG_BUG' since always need it.
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 19:19:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <519DFB42.7010509@asianux.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201305231259.43750.arnd@arndb.de>
On 05/23/2013 06:59 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> You don't just want to avoid the code for printing the bug message and
> the invalid instruction, we also want the compiler to not emit the
> function call or check the enum for unexpected values. The meaning of
> BUG() is really that person writing that statement was sure it cannot
> happen unless there is a bug in the kernel, which has likely already
> corrupted data. Printing a diagnostic at this point is nice if someone
> is there to look at it, but letting the kernel do further actions that
> may be undefined is not going to make things worse.
So I think neither unreachable() nor panic() are suitable for this
condition.
I guess 'CONFIG_BUG' is not belong to common features, now (and in the
future), so it is not suitable still exist in "asm-generic/bug.h", need
remove it firstly.
And then let the specific architectures to implement their own BUG(), if
they want some special features.
SO most of arches can skip this issue.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Asianux Corporation
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: gang.chen@asianux.com (Chen Gang)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arch: configuration, deleting 'CONFIG_BUG' since always need it.
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 19:19:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <519DFB42.7010509@asianux.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201305231259.43750.arnd@arndb.de>
On 05/23/2013 06:59 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> You don't just want to avoid the code for printing the bug message and
> the invalid instruction, we also want the compiler to not emit the
> function call or check the enum for unexpected values. The meaning of
> BUG() is really that person writing that statement was sure it cannot
> happen unless there is a bug in the kernel, which has likely already
> corrupted data. Printing a diagnostic at this point is nice if someone
> is there to look at it, but letting the kernel do further actions that
> may be undefined is not going to make things worse.
So I think neither unreachable() nor panic() are suitable for this
condition.
I guess 'CONFIG_BUG' is not belong to common features, now (and in the
future), so it is not suitable still exist in "asm-generic/bug.h", need
remove it firstly.
And then let the specific architectures to implement their own BUG(), if
they want some special features.
SO most of arches can skip this issue.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Asianux Corporation
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-23 11:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 127+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-23 7:57 [PATCH] arch: configuration, deleting 'CONFIG_BUG' since always need it Chen Gang
2013-05-23 7:57 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 7:57 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 7:57 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 7:57 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 7:57 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 8:40 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-05-23 8:40 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-05-23 8:40 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-05-23 8:40 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-05-23 8:54 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 8:54 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 8:54 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 8:54 ` Arnd Bergmann
[not found] ` <CAMuHMdU7QuzgmWCH145p8PVebBzPo8DBAvbY+0AZa2cmGXmRHw-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2013-05-23 9:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 9:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 9:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 9:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 9:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 9:12 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-05-23 9:12 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-05-23 9:12 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-05-23 9:12 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-05-23 9:39 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 9:39 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 9:39 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 9:39 ` Arnd Bergmann
[not found] ` <201305231139.38233.arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>
2013-05-23 10:04 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 10:04 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 10:04 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 10:04 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 10:41 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 10:41 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 10:41 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 10:41 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 10:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 10:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 10:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 10:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
[not found] ` <201305231259.43750.arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>
2013-05-23 11:19 ` Chen Gang [this message]
2013-05-23 11:19 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 11:19 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 11:19 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 11:19 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 11:24 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 11:24 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 11:24 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 11:24 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
[not found] ` <20130523112401.GO18614-l+eeeJia6m9vn6HldHNs0ANdhmdF6hFW@public.gmane.org>
2013-05-23 12:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 12:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 12:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 12:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 12:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 12:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 12:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 12:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 14:10 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-05-23 14:10 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-05-23 14:10 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-05-23 14:10 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-05-24 2:13 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-24 2:13 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-24 2:13 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-24 2:13 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-24 4:17 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-24 4:17 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-24 4:17 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-24 4:17 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-26 4:43 ` [PATCH v2] arch: configuration issue, random return value when disable 'CONFIG_BUG' Chen Gang
2013-05-26 4:43 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-26 4:43 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-26 4:43 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-28 8:19 ` [PATCH] arch: configuration, deleting 'CONFIG_BUG' since always need it Ingo Molnar
2013-05-28 8:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-28 8:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-28 8:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-28 8:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-28 8:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-28 8:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-05-28 10:25 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-28 10:25 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-28 10:25 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-28 10:25 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-28 10:25 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-28 14:49 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-28 14:49 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-28 14:49 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-28 14:49 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-28 14:49 ` Arnd Bergmann
[not found] ` <20130528081910.GA29557-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2013-05-28 14:55 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-05-28 14:55 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-05-28 14:55 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-05-28 14:55 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-05-28 14:55 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-05-28 15:43 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-28 15:43 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-28 15:43 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-28 15:43 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-28 15:43 ` Arnd Bergmann
[not found] ` <201305281743.52649.arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>
2013-05-28 16:06 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-05-28 16:06 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-05-28 16:06 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-05-28 16:06 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-05-28 16:06 ` H. Peter Anvin
[not found] ` <51A4D618.3080208-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
2013-05-28 17:20 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-28 17:20 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-28 17:20 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-28 17:20 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-28 17:20 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-05-23 10:09 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-05-23 10:09 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-05-23 10:09 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-05-23 10:09 ` Eric W. Biederman
[not found] ` <878v369fdd.fsf-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
2013-05-23 10:29 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 10:29 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 10:29 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 10:29 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 10:29 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 10:29 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-05-23 10:05 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 10:05 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 10:05 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-23 10:05 ` Chen Gang
2013-05-24 5:59 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-05-24 5:59 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-05-24 5:59 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-05-24 5:59 ` Eric W. Biederman
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=519DFB42.7010509@asianux.com \
--to=gang.chen-boixzgp5f+dbdgjk7y7tuq@public.gmane.org \
--cc=Catalin.Marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org \
--cc=arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org \
--cc=benh-XVmvHMARGAS8U2dJNN8I7kB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org \
--cc=deller-Mmb7MZpHnFY@public.gmane.org \
--cc=egtvedt-BrfabpQBY5qlHtIdYg32fQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=geert-Td1EMuHUCqxL1ZNQvxDV9g@public.gmane.org \
--cc=heiko.carstens-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=jejb-6jwH94ZQLHl74goWV3ctuw@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-arch-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-s390-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-sh-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=paulus-eUNUBHrolfbYtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org \
--cc=richard-/L3Ra7n9ekc@public.gmane.org \
--cc=walken-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=ysato-Rn4VEauK+AKRv+LV9MX5uooqe+aC9MnS@public.gmane.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.