All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: jiri.prchal@aksignal.cz, Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>
Cc: "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] gpiolib: Provide and export gpiod_export_name
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 23:36:51 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53D0A983.9000900@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53D0A7E4.1040707@aksignal.cz>

On 07/23/2014 11:29 PM, Jiří Prchal wrote:
> Hi,
> just to append to this: is in plan some kind of exporting named GPIOs from device tree to /sys/* or /dev/*? It would be very useful not only for me. Because I thing what GPIO is used for what is hardware design dependent same as for example what SPI chips are used. And SPI chips are in DT.
>

Yes, for one of my use cases that is how I would probably configure it;
alternatively it would be configured with platform data. It is
somewhat questionable, however, if this approach would be acceptable
for the Linux dt community, as it is a corner case between system
(hardware) description and configuration.

Guenter

> Dne 24.7.2014 v 07:44 Alexandre Courbot napsal(a):
>> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 3:12 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
>>> gpiod_export_name is similar to gpiod_export, but lets the user
>>> determine the name used to export a gpio pin.
>>>
>>> Currently, the pin name is determined by the chip driver with
>>> the 'names' array in the gpio_chip data structure, or it is set
>>> to gpioX, where X is the pin number, if no name is provided by
>>> the chip driver.
>>
>> Oh, my. I did not even know about this 'names' array. This is pretty
>> bad - a GPIO provider should not decide what its GPIOs are used for.
>>
>> Luckily for you, this creates a precedent that makes this patch more
>> acceptable, in that it is not making the situation worse. Even though
>> I consider both solutions to be bad, I actually prefer your
>> gpiod_export_name() function to that 'names' array in gpio_chip...
>>
>>>
>>> It is, however, desirable to be able to provide the pin name when
>>> exporting the pin, for example from platform code. In other words,
>>> it would be useful to move the naming decision from the pin provider
>>> to the pin consumer. The gpio-pca953x driver provides this capability
>>> as part of its platform data. Other drivers could be enhanced in a
>>> similar way; however, this is not always possible or easy to accomplish.
>>> For example, mfd client drivers such as gpio-ich already use platform
>>> data to pass information from the mfd master driver to the client driver.
>>> Overloading this platform data to also provide an array of gpio pin names
>>> would be a challenge if not impossible.
>>>
>>> The alternative to use gpiod_export_link is also not always desirable,
>>> since it only creates a named link to a different directory, meaning
>>> the named gpio pin is not available in /sys/class/gpio but only
>>> in some platform specific directory and thus not as generic as possible
>>> and/or useful.
>>>
>>> A specific example for a use case is a gpio pin which reports AC power
>>> loss to user space. Depending on the platform and platform variant,
>>> the pin can be provided by various gpio chip drivers and pin numbers.
>>> It would be very desirable to have a well defined location such as
>>> /sys/class/gpio/ac_power_loss for this pin, so user space knows where
>>> to find the attribute without knowledge of the underlying platform
>>> variant or oher hardware details.
>>
>> As I explained on the other thread, I still encourage you to have
>> these GPIOs under device nodes that give a hint of who is provided the
>> GPIO (effectively exporting the (dev, function) tuple to user-space)
>> instead of having them popping out under /sys/class/gpio where nobody
>> knows where they come from and name collisions are much more likely.
>>
>> Your message sounds like you have no choice but have the named GPIO
>> link under the gpiochip's device node, but this is not the case -
>> gpio_export_link() let's you specify the device under which the link
>> should appear. Make that device be your "scu" device and you can have
>> a consistent sysfs path to access your GPIOs.
>>
>> Allowing GPIOs to pop up in the same directory with an arbitrary name
>> is just a recipe for a mess. But that's a recipe that is already
>> allowed thanks to that 'names' array. So I'm really confused about
>> what to do with this patch. If you can do with gpio_export_link() (and
>> I have not seen evidence of the contrary), please go that way instead.
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
>>> ---
>>> Applies to tip of linux-gpio/for-next.
>>>
>>>   Documentation/gpio/sysfs.txt  | 12 ++++++++----
>>>   drivers/gpio/gpiolib-sysfs.c  | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
>>>   include/linux/gpio/consumer.h |  9 +++++++++
>>>   3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/gpio/sysfs.txt b/Documentation/gpio/sysfs.txt
>>> index c2c3a97..8e301b2 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/gpio/sysfs.txt
>>> +++ b/Documentation/gpio/sysfs.txt
>>> @@ -125,7 +125,11 @@ requested using gpio_request():
>>>          /* export the GPIO to userspace */
>>>          int gpiod_export(struct gpio_desc *desc, bool direction_may_change);
>>>
>>> -       /* reverse gpio_export() */
>>> +       /* export named GPIO to userspace */
>>> +       int gpiod_export_name(struct gpio_desc *desc, const char *ioname,
>>> +                       bool direction_may_change);
>>> +
>>> +       /* reverse gpio_export() / gpiod_export_name() */
>>>          void gpiod_unexport(struct gpio_desc *desc);
>>>
>>>          /* create a sysfs link to an exported GPIO node */
>>> @@ -136,9 +140,9 @@ requested using gpio_request():
>>>          int gpiod_sysfs_set_active_low(struct gpio_desc *desc, int value);
>>>
>>>   After a kernel driver requests a GPIO, it may only be made available in
>>> -the sysfs interface by gpiod_export(). The driver can control whether the
>>> -signal direction may change. This helps drivers prevent userspace code
>>> -from accidentally clobbering important system state.
>>> +the sysfs interface by gpiod_export() or gpiod_export_name(). The driver
>>> +can control whether the signal direction may change. This helps drivers
>>> +prevent userspace code from accidentally clobbering important system state.
>>>
>>>   This explicit exporting can help with debugging (by making some kinds
>>>   of experiments easier), or can provide an always-there interface that's
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-sysfs.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-sysfs.c
>>> index be45a92..7d36230 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-sysfs.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-sysfs.c
>>> @@ -523,13 +523,12 @@ static struct class gpio_class = {
>>>    *
>>>    * Returns zero on success, else an error.
>>>    */
>>> -int gpiod_export(struct gpio_desc *desc, bool direction_may_change)
>>> +int gpiod_export_name(struct gpio_desc *desc, const char *ioname,
>>> +                     bool direction_may_change)
>>>   {
>>>          unsigned long           flags;
>>>          int                     status;
>>> -       const char              *ioname = NULL;
>>>          struct device           *dev;
>>> -       int                     offset;
>>>
>>>          /* can't export until sysfs is available ... */
>>>          if (!gpio_class.p) {
>>> @@ -560,10 +559,6 @@ int gpiod_export(struct gpio_desc *desc, bool direction_may_change)
>>>                  direction_may_change = false;
>>>          spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_lock, flags);
>>>
>>> -       offset = gpio_chip_hwgpio(desc);
>>> -       if (desc->chip->names && desc->chip->names[offset])
>>> -               ioname = desc->chip->names[offset];
>>> -
>>>          dev = device_create(&gpio_class, desc->chip->dev, MKDEV(0, 0),
>>>                              desc, ioname ? ioname : "gpio%u",
>>>                              desc_to_gpio(desc));
>>> @@ -600,6 +595,20 @@ fail_unlock:
>>>          gpiod_dbg(desc, "%s: status %d\n", __func__, status);
>>>          return status;
>>>   }
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiod_export_name);
>>> +
>>> +int gpiod_export(struct gpio_desc *desc, bool direction_may_change)
>>> +{
>>> +       const char *ioname = NULL;
>>> +
>>> +       if (desc) {
>>> +               int offset = gpio_chip_hwgpio(desc);
>>> +
>>> +               if (desc->chip->names && desc->chip->names[offset])
>>> +                       ioname = desc->chip->names[offset];
>>
>> I'd add a
>>
>> else
>>      ioname = "gpio%u";
>>
>> so all the name-chosing code is grouped in the same place. Then you
>> can remove that same check from gpiod_export_name().
>>
>>> +       }
>>> +       return gpiod_export_name(desc, ioname, direction_may_change);
>>> +}
>>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiod_export);
>>>
>>>   static int match_export(struct device *dev, const void *data)
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/consumer.h b/include/linux/gpio/consumer.h
>>> index 05e53cc..986da3e 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/gpio/consumer.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/gpio/consumer.h
>>> @@ -260,6 +260,8 @@ static inline int desc_to_gpio(const struct gpio_desc *desc)
>>>   #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_GPIOLIB) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_GPIO_SYSFS)
>>>
>>>   int gpiod_export(struct gpio_desc *desc, bool direction_may_change);
>>> +int gpiod_export_name(struct gpio_desc *desc, const char *ioname,
>>> +                     bool direction_may_change);
>>>   int gpiod_export_link(struct device *dev, const char *name,
>>>                        struct gpio_desc *desc);
>>>   int gpiod_sysfs_set_active_low(struct gpio_desc *desc, int value);
>>> @@ -273,6 +275,13 @@ static inline int gpiod_export(struct gpio_desc *desc,
>>>          return -ENOSYS;
>>>   }
>>>
>>> +static inline int gpiod_export_name(struct gpio_desc *desc,
>>> +                                   const char *ioname,
>>> +                                   bool direction_may_change)
>>> +{
>>> +       return -ENOSYS;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>   static inline int gpiod_export_link(struct device *dev, const char *name,
>>>                                      struct gpio_desc *desc)
>>>   {
>>> --
>>> 1.9.1
>>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: jiri.prchal@aksignal.cz, Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>
Cc: "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] gpiolib: Provide and export gpiod_export_name
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 23:36:51 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53D0A983.9000900@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53D0A7E4.1040707@aksignal.cz>

On 07/23/2014 11:29 PM, Jiří Prchal wrote:
> Hi,
> just to append to this: is in plan some kind of exporting named GPIOs from device tree to /sys/* or /dev/*? It would be very useful not only for me. Because I thing what GPIO is used for what is hardware design dependent same as for example what SPI chips are used. And SPI chips are in DT.
>

Yes, for one of my use cases that is how I would probably configure it;
alternatively it would be configured with platform data. It is
somewhat questionable, however, if this approach would be acceptable
for the Linux dt community, as it is a corner case between system
(hardware) description and configuration.

Guenter

> Dne 24.7.2014 v 07:44 Alexandre Courbot napsal(a):
>> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 3:12 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
>>> gpiod_export_name is similar to gpiod_export, but lets the user
>>> determine the name used to export a gpio pin.
>>>
>>> Currently, the pin name is determined by the chip driver with
>>> the 'names' array in the gpio_chip data structure, or it is set
>>> to gpioX, where X is the pin number, if no name is provided by
>>> the chip driver.
>>
>> Oh, my. I did not even know about this 'names' array. This is pretty
>> bad - a GPIO provider should not decide what its GPIOs are used for.
>>
>> Luckily for you, this creates a precedent that makes this patch more
>> acceptable, in that it is not making the situation worse. Even though
>> I consider both solutions to be bad, I actually prefer your
>> gpiod_export_name() function to that 'names' array in gpio_chip...
>>
>>>
>>> It is, however, desirable to be able to provide the pin name when
>>> exporting the pin, for example from platform code. In other words,
>>> it would be useful to move the naming decision from the pin provider
>>> to the pin consumer. The gpio-pca953x driver provides this capability
>>> as part of its platform data. Other drivers could be enhanced in a
>>> similar way; however, this is not always possible or easy to accomplish.
>>> For example, mfd client drivers such as gpio-ich already use platform
>>> data to pass information from the mfd master driver to the client driver.
>>> Overloading this platform data to also provide an array of gpio pin names
>>> would be a challenge if not impossible.
>>>
>>> The alternative to use gpiod_export_link is also not always desirable,
>>> since it only creates a named link to a different directory, meaning
>>> the named gpio pin is not available in /sys/class/gpio but only
>>> in some platform specific directory and thus not as generic as possible
>>> and/or useful.
>>>
>>> A specific example for a use case is a gpio pin which reports AC power
>>> loss to user space. Depending on the platform and platform variant,
>>> the pin can be provided by various gpio chip drivers and pin numbers.
>>> It would be very desirable to have a well defined location such as
>>> /sys/class/gpio/ac_power_loss for this pin, so user space knows where
>>> to find the attribute without knowledge of the underlying platform
>>> variant or oher hardware details.
>>
>> As I explained on the other thread, I still encourage you to have
>> these GPIOs under device nodes that give a hint of who is provided the
>> GPIO (effectively exporting the (dev, function) tuple to user-space)
>> instead of having them popping out under /sys/class/gpio where nobody
>> knows where they come from and name collisions are much more likely.
>>
>> Your message sounds like you have no choice but have the named GPIO
>> link under the gpiochip's device node, but this is not the case -
>> gpio_export_link() let's you specify the device under which the link
>> should appear. Make that device be your "scu" device and you can have
>> a consistent sysfs path to access your GPIOs.
>>
>> Allowing GPIOs to pop up in the same directory with an arbitrary name
>> is just a recipe for a mess. But that's a recipe that is already
>> allowed thanks to that 'names' array. So I'm really confused about
>> what to do with this patch. If you can do with gpio_export_link() (and
>> I have not seen evidence of the contrary), please go that way instead.
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
>>> ---
>>> Applies to tip of linux-gpio/for-next.
>>>
>>>   Documentation/gpio/sysfs.txt  | 12 ++++++++----
>>>   drivers/gpio/gpiolib-sysfs.c  | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
>>>   include/linux/gpio/consumer.h |  9 +++++++++
>>>   3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/gpio/sysfs.txt b/Documentation/gpio/sysfs.txt
>>> index c2c3a97..8e301b2 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/gpio/sysfs.txt
>>> +++ b/Documentation/gpio/sysfs.txt
>>> @@ -125,7 +125,11 @@ requested using gpio_request():
>>>          /* export the GPIO to userspace */
>>>          int gpiod_export(struct gpio_desc *desc, bool direction_may_change);
>>>
>>> -       /* reverse gpio_export() */
>>> +       /* export named GPIO to userspace */
>>> +       int gpiod_export_name(struct gpio_desc *desc, const char *ioname,
>>> +                       bool direction_may_change);
>>> +
>>> +       /* reverse gpio_export() / gpiod_export_name() */
>>>          void gpiod_unexport(struct gpio_desc *desc);
>>>
>>>          /* create a sysfs link to an exported GPIO node */
>>> @@ -136,9 +140,9 @@ requested using gpio_request():
>>>          int gpiod_sysfs_set_active_low(struct gpio_desc *desc, int value);
>>>
>>>   After a kernel driver requests a GPIO, it may only be made available in
>>> -the sysfs interface by gpiod_export(). The driver can control whether the
>>> -signal direction may change. This helps drivers prevent userspace code
>>> -from accidentally clobbering important system state.
>>> +the sysfs interface by gpiod_export() or gpiod_export_name(). The driver
>>> +can control whether the signal direction may change. This helps drivers
>>> +prevent userspace code from accidentally clobbering important system state.
>>>
>>>   This explicit exporting can help with debugging (by making some kinds
>>>   of experiments easier), or can provide an always-there interface that's
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-sysfs.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-sysfs.c
>>> index be45a92..7d36230 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-sysfs.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-sysfs.c
>>> @@ -523,13 +523,12 @@ static struct class gpio_class = {
>>>    *
>>>    * Returns zero on success, else an error.
>>>    */
>>> -int gpiod_export(struct gpio_desc *desc, bool direction_may_change)
>>> +int gpiod_export_name(struct gpio_desc *desc, const char *ioname,
>>> +                     bool direction_may_change)
>>>   {
>>>          unsigned long           flags;
>>>          int                     status;
>>> -       const char              *ioname = NULL;
>>>          struct device           *dev;
>>> -       int                     offset;
>>>
>>>          /* can't export until sysfs is available ... */
>>>          if (!gpio_class.p) {
>>> @@ -560,10 +559,6 @@ int gpiod_export(struct gpio_desc *desc, bool direction_may_change)
>>>                  direction_may_change = false;
>>>          spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_lock, flags);
>>>
>>> -       offset = gpio_chip_hwgpio(desc);
>>> -       if (desc->chip->names && desc->chip->names[offset])
>>> -               ioname = desc->chip->names[offset];
>>> -
>>>          dev = device_create(&gpio_class, desc->chip->dev, MKDEV(0, 0),
>>>                              desc, ioname ? ioname : "gpio%u",
>>>                              desc_to_gpio(desc));
>>> @@ -600,6 +595,20 @@ fail_unlock:
>>>          gpiod_dbg(desc, "%s: status %d\n", __func__, status);
>>>          return status;
>>>   }
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiod_export_name);
>>> +
>>> +int gpiod_export(struct gpio_desc *desc, bool direction_may_change)
>>> +{
>>> +       const char *ioname = NULL;
>>> +
>>> +       if (desc) {
>>> +               int offset = gpio_chip_hwgpio(desc);
>>> +
>>> +               if (desc->chip->names && desc->chip->names[offset])
>>> +                       ioname = desc->chip->names[offset];
>>
>> I'd add a
>>
>> else
>>      ioname = "gpio%u";
>>
>> so all the name-chosing code is grouped in the same place. Then you
>> can remove that same check from gpiod_export_name().
>>
>>> +       }
>>> +       return gpiod_export_name(desc, ioname, direction_may_change);
>>> +}
>>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiod_export);
>>>
>>>   static int match_export(struct device *dev, const void *data)
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/consumer.h b/include/linux/gpio/consumer.h
>>> index 05e53cc..986da3e 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/gpio/consumer.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/gpio/consumer.h
>>> @@ -260,6 +260,8 @@ static inline int desc_to_gpio(const struct gpio_desc *desc)
>>>   #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_GPIOLIB) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_GPIO_SYSFS)
>>>
>>>   int gpiod_export(struct gpio_desc *desc, bool direction_may_change);
>>> +int gpiod_export_name(struct gpio_desc *desc, const char *ioname,
>>> +                     bool direction_may_change);
>>>   int gpiod_export_link(struct device *dev, const char *name,
>>>                        struct gpio_desc *desc);
>>>   int gpiod_sysfs_set_active_low(struct gpio_desc *desc, int value);
>>> @@ -273,6 +275,13 @@ static inline int gpiod_export(struct gpio_desc *desc,
>>>          return -ENOSYS;
>>>   }
>>>
>>> +static inline int gpiod_export_name(struct gpio_desc *desc,
>>> +                                   const char *ioname,
>>> +                                   bool direction_may_change)
>>> +{
>>> +       return -ENOSYS;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>   static inline int gpiod_export_link(struct device *dev, const char *name,
>>>                                      struct gpio_desc *desc)
>>>   {
>>> --
>>> 1.9.1
>>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>
>


  reply	other threads:[~2014-07-24  6:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-23 18:12 [RFC PATCH] gpiolib: Provide and export gpiod_export_name Guenter Roeck
2014-07-24  5:44 ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-07-24  6:29   ` Jiří Prchal
2014-07-24  6:36     ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2014-07-24  6:36       ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-25  7:46       ` Jiří Prchal
2014-07-25 14:09         ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-25 14:09           ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-24  6:33   ` Guenter Roeck
2014-08-07  6:25     ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-08-07  7:34       ` Guenter Roeck
2014-08-11 15:01         ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-08-11 15:15           ` Guenter Roeck
2014-08-11 15:20             ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-08-11 16:13               ` Guenter Roeck
2014-08-11 22:05                 ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-08-13  0:29                   ` Guenter Roeck
2014-08-29  5:44               ` Linus Walleij
2014-08-29  5:54                 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-08-29 17:00                   ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-08-29 17:37                     ` Guenter Roeck
2014-08-31  0:57                       ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-09-05  8:46                         ` Linus Walleij

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=53D0A983.9000900@roeck-us.net \
    --to=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=gnurou@gmail.com \
    --cc=jiri.prchal@aksignal.cz \
    --cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rdunlap@infradead.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.