From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 2/7] mm: multi-gen LRU: Have secondary MMUs participate in aging
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:23:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zl5eat0sh7rrspUG@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADrL8HU734C_OQhzszWJWMXEXLN6HkBo4yweN2fX4BbOegXrFA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jun 03, 2024, James Houghton wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 4:03?PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
> > But before we do that, I think we need to perform due dilegence (or provide data)
> > showing that having KVM take mmu_lock for write in the "fast only" API provides
> > better total behavior. I.e. that the additional accuracy is indeed worth the cost.
>
> That sounds good to me. I'll drop the Kconfig. I'm not really sure
> what to do about the self-test, but that's not really all that
> important.
Enable it only on architectures+setups that are guaranteed to implement the
fast-only API? E.g. on x86, it darn well better be active if the TDP MMU is
enabled. If the test fails because that doesn't hold true, then we _want_ the
failure.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: James Houghton <jthoughton@google.com>
Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
Ankit Agrawal <ankita@nvidia.com>,
Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Bibo Mao <maobibo@loongson.cn>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>,
Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
Shaoqin Huang <shahuang@redhat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Tianrui Zhao <zhaotianrui@loongson.cn>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/7] mm: multi-gen LRU: Have secondary MMUs participate in aging
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:23:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zl5eat0sh7rrspUG@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADrL8HU734C_OQhzszWJWMXEXLN6HkBo4yweN2fX4BbOegXrFA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jun 03, 2024, James Houghton wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 4:03 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
> > But before we do that, I think we need to perform due dilegence (or provide data)
> > showing that having KVM take mmu_lock for write in the "fast only" API provides
> > better total behavior. I.e. that the additional accuracy is indeed worth the cost.
>
> That sounds good to me. I'll drop the Kconfig. I'm not really sure
> what to do about the self-test, but that's not really all that
> important.
Enable it only on architectures+setups that are guaranteed to implement the
fast-only API? E.g. on x86, it darn well better be active if the TDP MMU is
enabled. If the test fails because that doesn't hold true, then we _want_ the
failure.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: James Houghton <jthoughton@google.com>
Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
Ankit Agrawal <ankita@nvidia.com>,
Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Bibo Mao <maobibo@loongson.cn>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>,
Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
Shaoqin Huang <shahuang@redhat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Tianrui Zhao <zhaotianrui@loongson.cn>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/7] mm: multi-gen LRU: Have secondary MMUs participate in aging
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:23:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zl5eat0sh7rrspUG@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADrL8HU734C_OQhzszWJWMXEXLN6HkBo4yweN2fX4BbOegXrFA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jun 03, 2024, James Houghton wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 4:03 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
> > But before we do that, I think we need to perform due dilegence (or provide data)
> > showing that having KVM take mmu_lock for write in the "fast only" API provides
> > better total behavior. I.e. that the additional accuracy is indeed worth the cost.
>
> That sounds good to me. I'll drop the Kconfig. I'm not really sure
> what to do about the self-test, but that's not really all that
> important.
Enable it only on architectures+setups that are guaranteed to implement the
fast-only API? E.g. on x86, it darn well better be active if the TDP MMU is
enabled. If the test fails because that doesn't hold true, then we _want_ the
failure.
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: James Houghton <jthoughton@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Shaoqin Huang <shahuang@redhat.com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Bibo Mao <maobibo@loongson.cn>,
loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com >,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Ankit Agrawal <ankita@nvidia.com>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Tianrui Zhao <zhaotianrui@loongson.cn>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/7] mm: multi-gen LRU: Have secondary MMUs participate in aging
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:23:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zl5eat0sh7rrspUG@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADrL8HU734C_OQhzszWJWMXEXLN6HkBo4yweN2fX4BbOegXrFA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jun 03, 2024, James Houghton wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 4:03 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
> > But before we do that, I think we need to perform due dilegence (or provide data)
> > showing that having KVM take mmu_lock for write in the "fast only" API provides
> > better total behavior. I.e. that the additional accuracy is indeed worth the cost.
>
> That sounds good to me. I'll drop the Kconfig. I'm not really sure
> what to do about the self-test, but that's not really all that
> important.
Enable it only on architectures+setups that are guaranteed to implement the
fast-only API? E.g. on x86, it darn well better be active if the TDP MMU is
enabled. If the test fails because that doesn't hold true, then we _want_ the
failure.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: James Houghton <jthoughton@google.com>
Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
Ankit Agrawal <ankita@nvidia.com>,
Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Bibo Mao <maobibo@loongson.cn>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@google.com>,
Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
Shaoqin Huang <shahuang@redhat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Tianrui Zhao <zhaotianrui@loongson.cn>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/7] mm: multi-gen LRU: Have secondary MMUs participate in aging
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:23:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zl5eat0sh7rrspUG@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADrL8HU734C_OQhzszWJWMXEXLN6HkBo4yweN2fX4BbOegXrFA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jun 03, 2024, James Houghton wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 4:03 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
> > But before we do that, I think we need to perform due dilegence (or provide data)
> > showing that having KVM take mmu_lock for write in the "fast only" API provides
> > better total behavior. I.e. that the additional accuracy is indeed worth the cost.
>
> That sounds good to me. I'll drop the Kconfig. I'm not really sure
> what to do about the self-test, but that's not really all that
> important.
Enable it only on architectures+setups that are guaranteed to implement the
fast-only API? E.g. on x86, it darn well better be active if the TDP MMU is
enabled. If the test fails because that doesn't hold true, then we _want_ the
failure.
_______________________________________________
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:[~2024-06-04 0:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 174+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-29 18:05 [PATCH v4 0/7] mm: multi-gen LRU: Walk secondary MMU page tables while aging James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` [PATCH v4 1/7] mm/Kconfig: Add LRU_GEN_WALKS_SECONDARY_MMU James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` [PATCH v4 2/7] mm: multi-gen LRU: Have secondary MMUs participate in aging James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 21:03 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-29 21:03 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-29 21:03 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-29 21:03 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-29 21:03 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-29 21:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 21:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 21:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 21:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 21:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 22:21 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-29 22:21 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-29 22:21 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-29 22:21 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-29 22:21 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-29 22:58 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 22:58 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 22:58 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 22:58 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 22:58 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-30 1:08 ` James Houghton
2024-05-30 1:08 ` James Houghton
2024-05-30 1:08 ` James Houghton
2024-05-30 1:08 ` James Houghton
2024-05-30 1:08 ` James Houghton
2024-05-31 6:05 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 6:06 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 6:05 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 6:05 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 7:02 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 7:02 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 7:02 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 7:02 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 7:02 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 16:45 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 16:45 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 16:45 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 16:45 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 16:45 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 18:41 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 18:41 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 18:41 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 18:41 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 18:41 ` Oliver Upton
2024-06-03 22:45 ` James Houghton
2024-06-03 22:45 ` James Houghton
2024-06-03 22:45 ` James Houghton
2024-06-03 22:45 ` James Houghton
2024-06-03 22:45 ` James Houghton
2024-06-03 23:03 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-06-03 23:03 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-06-03 23:03 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-06-03 23:03 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-06-03 23:03 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-06-03 23:16 ` James Houghton
2024-06-03 23:16 ` James Houghton
2024-06-03 23:16 ` James Houghton
2024-06-03 23:16 ` James Houghton
2024-06-03 23:16 ` James Houghton
2024-06-04 0:23 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2024-06-04 0:23 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-06-04 0:23 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-06-04 0:23 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-06-04 0:23 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-31 7:24 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 7:24 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 7:24 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 7:24 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 7:24 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 20:31 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 20:31 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 20:31 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 20:31 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 20:31 ` Yu Zhao
2024-05-31 21:06 ` David Matlack
2024-05-31 21:06 ` David Matlack
2024-05-31 21:06 ` David Matlack
2024-05-31 21:06 ` David Matlack
2024-05-31 21:06 ` David Matlack
2024-05-31 21:09 ` David Matlack
2024-05-31 21:09 ` David Matlack
2024-05-31 21:09 ` David Matlack
2024-05-31 21:09 ` David Matlack
2024-05-31 21:09 ` David Matlack
2024-05-31 21:18 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 21:18 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 21:18 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 21:18 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 21:18 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` [PATCH v4 3/7] KVM: Add lockless memslot walk to KVM James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 21:51 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 21:51 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 21:51 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 21:51 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 21:51 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-30 3:26 ` James Houghton
2024-05-30 3:26 ` James Houghton
2024-05-30 3:26 ` James Houghton
2024-05-30 3:26 ` James Houghton
2024-05-30 3:26 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` [PATCH v4 4/7] KVM: Move MMU lock acquisition for test/clear_young to architecture James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 21:55 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 21:55 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 21:55 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 21:55 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 21:55 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-30 3:27 ` James Houghton
2024-05-30 3:27 ` James Houghton
2024-05-30 3:27 ` James Houghton
2024-05-30 3:27 ` James Houghton
2024-05-30 3:27 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` [PATCH v4 5/7] KVM: x86: Relax locking for kvm_test_age_gfn and kvm_age_gfn James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` [PATCH v4 6/7] KVM: arm64: " James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-31 19:11 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 19:11 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 19:11 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 19:11 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 19:11 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 19:18 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 19:18 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 19:18 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 19:18 ` Oliver Upton
2024-05-31 19:18 ` Oliver Upton
2024-06-04 22:20 ` James Houghton
2024-06-04 22:20 ` James Houghton
2024-06-04 22:20 ` James Houghton
2024-06-04 22:20 ` James Houghton
2024-06-04 22:20 ` James Houghton
2024-06-04 23:00 ` Oliver Upton
2024-06-04 23:00 ` Oliver Upton
2024-06-04 23:00 ` Oliver Upton
2024-06-04 23:00 ` Oliver Upton
2024-06-04 23:00 ` Oliver Upton
2024-06-04 23:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-06-04 23:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-06-04 23:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-06-04 23:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-06-04 23:36 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-05-29 18:05 ` [PATCH v4 7/7] KVM: selftests: Add multi-gen LRU aging to access_tracking_perf_test James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
2024-05-29 18:05 ` James Houghton
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=Zl5eat0sh7rrspUG@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=kvm-riscv@lists.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.