All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
diff for duplicates of <ZNvaJ3igvcvTZ/8k@google.com>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 49195ba..f82927c 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ ASID (SNP) / HKID (TDX) to which it's bound.
 > With this, the bindings don't outlive the VM, but the data/memory
 > does. I think this split design you proposed is really nice.
 > 
-> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem?s xarray, and we can
+> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem’s xarray, and we can
 > >> enforce that a gmem file is used only with one VM:
 > >>
 > >> + When binding a memslot to the file, if a kvm pointer exists, it must
@@ -186,5 +186,5 @@ with my clarification about struct kvm vs. virtual machine?
 >   file/inode split. (Refcounting in [2] is buggy because the file can't
 >   take a refcount on KVM, but it would work without taking that refcount)
 > 
-> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng at google.com/T/
+> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng@google.com/T/
 > [2] https://github.com/googleprodkernel/linux-cc/commit/dd5ac5e53f14a1ef9915c9c1e4cc1006a40b49df
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index ccbdbec..4649ee8 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -1,9 +1,48 @@
  "ref\0ZNKv9ul2I7A4V7IF@google.com\0"
  "ref\0diqzh6p02lk4.fsf@ackerleytng-ctop.c.googlers.com\0"
  "From\0Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>\0"
- "Subject\0[RFC PATCH v11 12/29] KVM: Add KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD ioctl() for guest-specific backing memory\0"
+ "Subject\0Re: [RFC PATCH v11 12/29] KVM: Add KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD ioctl() for guest-specific backing memory\0"
  "Date\0Tue, 15 Aug 2023 13:03:51 -0700\0"
- "To\0kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org\0"
+ "To\0Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@google.com>\0"
+ "Cc\0pbonzini@redhat.com"
+  maz@kernel.org
+  oliver.upton@linux.dev
+  chenhuacai@kernel.org
+  mpe@ellerman.id.au
+  anup@brainfault.org
+  paul.walmsley@sifive.com
+  palmer@dabbelt.com
+  aou@eecs.berkeley.edu
+  willy@infradead.org
+  akpm@linux-foundation.org
+  paul@paul-moore.com
+  jmorris@namei.org
+  serge@hallyn.com
+  kvm@vger.kernel.org
+  linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
+  kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
+  linux-mips@vger.kernel.org
+  linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
+  kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org
+  linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
+  linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
+  linux-mm@kvack.org
+  linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
+  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
+  chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com
+  tabba@google.com
+  jarkko@kernel.org
+  yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com
+  vannapurve@google.com
+  mail@maciej.szmigiero.name
+  vbabka@suse.cz
+  david@redhat.com
+  qperret@google.com
+  michael.roth@amd.com
+  wei.w.wang@intel.com
+  liam.merwick@oracle.com
+  isaku.yamahata@gmail.com
+ " kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com\0"
  "\00:1\0"
  "b\0"
  "On Tue, Aug 15, 2023, Ackerley Tng wrote:\n"
@@ -40,7 +79,7 @@
  "> With this, the bindings don't outlive the VM, but the data/memory\n"
  "> does. I think this split design you proposed is really nice.\n"
  "> \n"
- "> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem?s xarray, and we can\n"
+ "> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem\342\200\231s xarray, and we can\n"
  "> >> enforce that a gmem file is used only with one VM:\n"
  "> >>\n"
  "> >> + When binding a memslot to the file, if a kvm pointer exists, it must\n"
@@ -194,7 +233,7 @@
  ">   file/inode split. (Refcounting in [2] is buggy because the file can't\n"
  ">   take a refcount on KVM, but it would work without taking that refcount)\n"
  "> \n"
- "> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng at google.com/T/\n"
+ "> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng@google.com/T/\n"
  > [2] https://github.com/googleprodkernel/linux-cc/commit/dd5ac5e53f14a1ef9915c9c1e4cc1006a40b49df
 
-85fb38fcb80e09441fcbf88099cf4ba3ae056444ac0752a170343758e7813c81
+808a583e01bc9e6371979774b7d0cced357a1df4b45c2cb27edb98f5d0866b29

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N2/1.txt
index 49195ba..0671896 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N2/1.txt
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ ASID (SNP) / HKID (TDX) to which it's bound.
 > With this, the bindings don't outlive the VM, but the data/memory
 > does. I think this split design you proposed is really nice.
 > 
-> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem?s xarray, and we can
+> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem’s xarray, and we can
 > >> enforce that a gmem file is used only with one VM:
 > >>
 > >> + When binding a memslot to the file, if a kvm pointer exists, it must
@@ -186,5 +186,10 @@ with my clarification about struct kvm vs. virtual machine?
 >   file/inode split. (Refcounting in [2] is buggy because the file can't
 >   take a refcount on KVM, but it would work without taking that refcount)
 > 
-> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng at google.com/T/
+> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng@google.com/T/
 > [2] https://github.com/googleprodkernel/linux-cc/commit/dd5ac5e53f14a1ef9915c9c1e4cc1006a40b49df
+
+_______________________________________________
+linux-riscv mailing list
+linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
+http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N2/content_digest
index ccbdbec..249836a 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N2/content_digest
@@ -1,9 +1,48 @@
  "ref\0ZNKv9ul2I7A4V7IF@google.com\0"
  "ref\0diqzh6p02lk4.fsf@ackerleytng-ctop.c.googlers.com\0"
  "From\0Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>\0"
- "Subject\0[RFC PATCH v11 12/29] KVM: Add KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD ioctl() for guest-specific backing memory\0"
+ "Subject\0Re: [RFC PATCH v11 12/29] KVM: Add KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD ioctl() for guest-specific backing memory\0"
  "Date\0Tue, 15 Aug 2023 13:03:51 -0700\0"
- "To\0kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org\0"
+ "To\0Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@google.com>\0"
+ "Cc\0pbonzini@redhat.com"
+  maz@kernel.org
+  oliver.upton@linux.dev
+  chenhuacai@kernel.org
+  mpe@ellerman.id.au
+  anup@brainfault.org
+  paul.walmsley@sifive.com
+  palmer@dabbelt.com
+  aou@eecs.berkeley.edu
+  willy@infradead.org
+  akpm@linux-foundation.org
+  paul@paul-moore.com
+  jmorris@namei.org
+  serge@hallyn.com
+  kvm@vger.kernel.org
+  linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
+  kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
+  linux-mips@vger.kernel.org
+  linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
+  kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org
+  linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
+  linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
+  linux-mm@kvack.org
+  linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
+  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
+  chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com
+  tabba@google.com
+  jarkko@kernel.org
+  yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com
+  vannapurve@google.com
+  mail@maciej.szmigiero.name
+  vbabka@suse.cz
+  david@redhat.com
+  qperret@google.com
+  michael.roth@amd.com
+  wei.w.wang@intel.com
+  liam.merwick@oracle.com
+  isaku.yamahata@gmail.com
+ " kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com\0"
  "\00:1\0"
  "b\0"
  "On Tue, Aug 15, 2023, Ackerley Tng wrote:\n"
@@ -40,7 +79,7 @@
  "> With this, the bindings don't outlive the VM, but the data/memory\n"
  "> does. I think this split design you proposed is really nice.\n"
  "> \n"
- "> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem?s xarray, and we can\n"
+ "> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem\342\200\231s xarray, and we can\n"
  "> >> enforce that a gmem file is used only with one VM:\n"
  "> >>\n"
  "> >> + When binding a memslot to the file, if a kvm pointer exists, it must\n"
@@ -194,7 +233,12 @@
  ">   file/inode split. (Refcounting in [2] is buggy because the file can't\n"
  ">   take a refcount on KVM, but it would work without taking that refcount)\n"
  "> \n"
- "> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng at google.com/T/\n"
- > [2] https://github.com/googleprodkernel/linux-cc/commit/dd5ac5e53f14a1ef9915c9c1e4cc1006a40b49df
+ "> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng@google.com/T/\n"
+ "> [2] https://github.com/googleprodkernel/linux-cc/commit/dd5ac5e53f14a1ef9915c9c1e4cc1006a40b49df\n"
+ "\n"
+ "_______________________________________________\n"
+ "linux-riscv mailing list\n"
+ "linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org\n"
+ http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
 
-85fb38fcb80e09441fcbf88099cf4ba3ae056444ac0752a170343758e7813c81
+853deb076f7e56da33182d9c624145b6bb16bd6d5081f337391cda5f200491cf

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N3/1.txt
index 49195ba..f82927c 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N3/1.txt
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ ASID (SNP) / HKID (TDX) to which it's bound.
 > With this, the bindings don't outlive the VM, but the data/memory
 > does. I think this split design you proposed is really nice.
 > 
-> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem?s xarray, and we can
+> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem’s xarray, and we can
 > >> enforce that a gmem file is used only with one VM:
 > >>
 > >> + When binding a memslot to the file, if a kvm pointer exists, it must
@@ -186,5 +186,5 @@ with my clarification about struct kvm vs. virtual machine?
 >   file/inode split. (Refcounting in [2] is buggy because the file can't
 >   take a refcount on KVM, but it would work without taking that refcount)
 > 
-> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng at google.com/T/
+> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng@google.com/T/
 > [2] https://github.com/googleprodkernel/linux-cc/commit/dd5ac5e53f14a1ef9915c9c1e4cc1006a40b49df
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N3/content_digest
index ccbdbec..99a2346 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N3/content_digest
@@ -1,9 +1,47 @@
  "ref\0ZNKv9ul2I7A4V7IF@google.com\0"
  "ref\0diqzh6p02lk4.fsf@ackerleytng-ctop.c.googlers.com\0"
  "From\0Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>\0"
- "Subject\0[RFC PATCH v11 12/29] KVM: Add KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD ioctl() for guest-specific backing memory\0"
+ "Subject\0Re: [RFC PATCH v11 12/29] KVM: Add KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD ioctl() for guest-specific backing memory\0"
  "Date\0Tue, 15 Aug 2023 13:03:51 -0700\0"
- "To\0kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org\0"
+ "To\0Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@google.com>\0"
+ "Cc\0kvm@vger.kernel.org"
+  david@redhat.com
+  yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com
+  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
+  linux-mm@kvack.org
+  chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com
+  linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
+  isaku.yamahata@gmail.com
+  paul@paul-moore.com
+  maz@kernel.org
+  chenhuacai@kernel.org
+  jmorris@namei.org
+  willy@infradead.org
+  wei.w.wang@intel.com
+  tabba@google.com
+  jarkko@kernel.org
+  serge@hallyn.com
+  mail@maciej.szmigiero.name
+  aou@eecs.berkeley.edu
+  vbabka@suse.cz
+  michael.roth@amd.com
+  paul.walmsley@sifive.com
+  kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
+  linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
+  qperret@google.com
+  liam.merwick@oracle.com
+  linux-mips@vger.kernel.org
+  oliver.upton@linux.dev
+  linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
+  palmer@dabbelt.com
+  kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org
+  anup@brainfault.org
+  linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
+  pbonzini@redhat.com
+  akpm@linux-foundation.org
+  vannapurve@google.com
+  linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
+ " kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com\0"
  "\00:1\0"
  "b\0"
  "On Tue, Aug 15, 2023, Ackerley Tng wrote:\n"
@@ -40,7 +78,7 @@
  "> With this, the bindings don't outlive the VM, but the data/memory\n"
  "> does. I think this split design you proposed is really nice.\n"
  "> \n"
- "> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem?s xarray, and we can\n"
+ "> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem\342\200\231s xarray, and we can\n"
  "> >> enforce that a gmem file is used only with one VM:\n"
  "> >>\n"
  "> >> + When binding a memslot to the file, if a kvm pointer exists, it must\n"
@@ -194,7 +232,7 @@
  ">   file/inode split. (Refcounting in [2] is buggy because the file can't\n"
  ">   take a refcount on KVM, but it would work without taking that refcount)\n"
  "> \n"
- "> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng at google.com/T/\n"
+ "> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng@google.com/T/\n"
  > [2] https://github.com/googleprodkernel/linux-cc/commit/dd5ac5e53f14a1ef9915c9c1e4cc1006a40b49df
 
-85fb38fcb80e09441fcbf88099cf4ba3ae056444ac0752a170343758e7813c81
+93fcdc9f5e07afb4327432885fc52ec9de7c8c9d6e2ad430f8c762d60ed0b6b9

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N4/1.txt
index 49195ba..00e63dd 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N4/1.txt
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ ASID (SNP) / HKID (TDX) to which it's bound.
 > With this, the bindings don't outlive the VM, but the data/memory
 > does. I think this split design you proposed is really nice.
 > 
-> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem?s xarray, and we can
+> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem’s xarray, and we can
 > >> enforce that a gmem file is used only with one VM:
 > >>
 > >> + When binding a memslot to the file, if a kvm pointer exists, it must
@@ -186,5 +186,10 @@ with my clarification about struct kvm vs. virtual machine?
 >   file/inode split. (Refcounting in [2] is buggy because the file can't
 >   take a refcount on KVM, but it would work without taking that refcount)
 > 
-> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng at google.com/T/
+> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng@google.com/T/
 > [2] https://github.com/googleprodkernel/linux-cc/commit/dd5ac5e53f14a1ef9915c9c1e4cc1006a40b49df
+
+_______________________________________________
+linux-arm-kernel mailing list
+linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
+http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N4/content_digest
index ccbdbec..d841fd7 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N4/content_digest
@@ -1,9 +1,48 @@
  "ref\0ZNKv9ul2I7A4V7IF@google.com\0"
  "ref\0diqzh6p02lk4.fsf@ackerleytng-ctop.c.googlers.com\0"
  "From\0Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>\0"
- "Subject\0[RFC PATCH v11 12/29] KVM: Add KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD ioctl() for guest-specific backing memory\0"
+ "Subject\0Re: [RFC PATCH v11 12/29] KVM: Add KVM_CREATE_GUEST_MEMFD ioctl() for guest-specific backing memory\0"
  "Date\0Tue, 15 Aug 2023 13:03:51 -0700\0"
- "To\0kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org\0"
+ "To\0Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@google.com>\0"
+ "Cc\0pbonzini@redhat.com"
+  maz@kernel.org
+  oliver.upton@linux.dev
+  chenhuacai@kernel.org
+  mpe@ellerman.id.au
+  anup@brainfault.org
+  paul.walmsley@sifive.com
+  palmer@dabbelt.com
+  aou@eecs.berkeley.edu
+  willy@infradead.org
+  akpm@linux-foundation.org
+  paul@paul-moore.com
+  jmorris@namei.org
+  serge@hallyn.com
+  kvm@vger.kernel.org
+  linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
+  kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
+  linux-mips@vger.kernel.org
+  linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
+  kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org
+  linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
+  linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
+  linux-mm@kvack.org
+  linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
+  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
+  chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com
+  tabba@google.com
+  jarkko@kernel.org
+  yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com
+  vannapurve@google.com
+  mail@maciej.szmigiero.name
+  vbabka@suse.cz
+  david@redhat.com
+  qperret@google.com
+  michael.roth@amd.com
+  wei.w.wang@intel.com
+  liam.merwick@oracle.com
+  isaku.yamahata@gmail.com
+ " kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com\0"
  "\00:1\0"
  "b\0"
  "On Tue, Aug 15, 2023, Ackerley Tng wrote:\n"
@@ -40,7 +79,7 @@
  "> With this, the bindings don't outlive the VM, but the data/memory\n"
  "> does. I think this split design you proposed is really nice.\n"
  "> \n"
- "> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem?s xarray, and we can\n"
+ "> >> The KVM pointer is shared among all the bindings in gmem\342\200\231s xarray, and we can\n"
  "> >> enforce that a gmem file is used only with one VM:\n"
  "> >>\n"
  "> >> + When binding a memslot to the file, if a kvm pointer exists, it must\n"
@@ -194,7 +233,12 @@
  ">   file/inode split. (Refcounting in [2] is buggy because the file can't\n"
  ">   take a refcount on KVM, but it would work without taking that refcount)\n"
  "> \n"
- "> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng at google.com/T/\n"
- > [2] https://github.com/googleprodkernel/linux-cc/commit/dd5ac5e53f14a1ef9915c9c1e4cc1006a40b49df
+ "> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1691446946.git.ackerleytng@google.com/T/\n"
+ "> [2] https://github.com/googleprodkernel/linux-cc/commit/dd5ac5e53f14a1ef9915c9c1e4cc1006a40b49df\n"
+ "\n"
+ "_______________________________________________\n"
+ "linux-arm-kernel mailing list\n"
+ "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org\n"
+ http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
 
-85fb38fcb80e09441fcbf88099cf4ba3ae056444ac0752a170343758e7813c81
+a83678e984aec124b848cf710930d129389c1ac84c8e8b8fcb3f2ebcfd8cfd6f

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.