mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	H Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>, Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
	Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by kernel
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 21:55:21 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200114055521.GI14928@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200110192409.GA23315@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com>

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 11:24:09AM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> 
> A split-lock occurs when an atomic instruction operates on data
> that spans two cache lines. In order to maintain atomicity the
> core takes a global bus lock.
> 
> This is typically >1000 cycles slower than an atomic operation
> within a cache line. It also disrupts performance on other cores
> (which must wait for the bus lock to be released before their
> memory operations can complete. For real-time systems this may
> mean missing deadlines. For other systems it may just be very
> annoying.
> 
> Some CPUs have the capability to raise an #AC trap when a
> split lock is attempted.
> 
> Provide a command line option to give the user choices on how
> to handle this. split_lock_detect=
> 	off	- not enabled (no traps for split locks)
> 	warn	- warn once when an application does a
> 		  split lock, bust allow it to continue
> 		  running.
> 	fatal	- Send SIGBUS to applications that cause split lock
> 
> Default is "warn". Note that if the kernel hits a split lock
> in any mode other than "off" it will OOPs.
> 
> One implementation wrinkle is that the MSR to control the
> split lock detection is per-core, not per thread. This might
> result in some short lived races on HT systems in "warn" mode
> if Linux tries to enable on one thread while disabling on
> the other. Race analysis by Sean Christopherson:
> 
>   - Toggling of split-lock is only done in "warn" mode.  Worst case
>     scenario of a race is that a misbehaving task will generate multiple
>     #AC exceptions on the same instruction.  And this race will only occur
>     if both siblings are running tasks that generate split-lock #ACs, e.g.
>     a race where sibling threads are writing different values will only
>     occur if CPUx is disabling split-lock after an #AC and CPUy is
>     re-enabling split-lock after *its* previous task generated an #AC.
>   - Transitioning between modes at runtime isn't supported and disabling
>     is tracked per task, so hardware will always reach a steady state that
>     matches the configured mode.  I.e. split-lock is guaranteed to be
>     enabled in hardware once all _TIF_SLD threads have been scheduled out.
> 
> Co-developed-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>

Need Fenghua's SoB.

> Co-developed-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>

Co-developed-by for Peter not needed since he's the author (attributed
via From).

> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
> ---
> 
> I think all the known places where split locks occur in the kernel
> have already been patched, or the patches are queued for the upcoming
> merge window.  If we missed some, well this patch will help find them
> (for people with Icelake or Icelake Xeon systems). PeterZ didn't see
> any application level use of split locks in a few hours of runtime
> on his desktop. So likely little fallout there (default is just to
> warn for applications, so just console noise rather than failure).
> 
>  .../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt         |  18 ++
>  arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h                    |  17 ++
>  arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h            |   2 +
>  arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h              |   8 +
>  arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h            |   6 +-
>  arch/x86/include/asm/traps.h                  |   1 +
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c                  |   2 +
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c                   | 170 ++++++++++++++++++
>  arch/x86/kernel/process.c                     |   3 +
>  arch/x86/kernel/traps.c                       |  29 ++-
>  10 files changed, 252 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> index ade4e6ec23e0..173c1acff5f0 100644
> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -3181,6 +3181,24 @@
>  
>  	nosoftlockup	[KNL] Disable the soft-lockup detector.
>  
> +	split_lock_detect=

Would it make sense to name this split_lock_ac?  To help clarify what the
param does and to future proof a bit in the event split lock detection is
able to signal some other form of fault/trap.

> +			[X86] Enable split lock detection
> +
> +			When enabled (and if hardware support is present), atomic
> +			instructions that access data across cache line
> +			boundaries will result in an alignment check exception.
> +
> +			off	- not enabled
> +
> +			warn	- the kernel will pr_alert about applications
> +				  triggering the #AC exception
> +
> +			fatal	- the kernel will SIGBUS applications that
> +				  trigger the #AC exception.
> +
> +			For any more other than 'off' the kernel will die if
> +			it (or firmware) will trigger #AC.
> +
>  	nosync		[HW,M68K] Disables sync negotiation for all devices.
>  
>  	nowatchdog	[KNL] Disable both lockup detectors, i.e.

...

> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h
> index d779366ce3f8..d23638a0525e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/thread_info.h
> @@ -92,6 +92,7 @@ struct thread_info {
>  #define TIF_NOCPUID		15	/* CPUID is not accessible in userland */
>  #define TIF_NOTSC		16	/* TSC is not accessible in userland */
>  #define TIF_IA32		17	/* IA32 compatibility process */
> +#define TIF_SLD			18	/* split_lock_detect */

A more informative name comment would be helpful since the flag is set when
SLD is disabled by the previous task.  Something like? 

#define TIF_NEED_SLD_RESTORE	18	/* Restore split lock detection on context switch */

>  #define TIF_NOHZ		19	/* in adaptive nohz mode */
>  #define TIF_MEMDIE		20	/* is terminating due to OOM killer */
>  #define TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG	21	/* idle is polling for TIF_NEED_RESCHED */
> @@ -122,6 +123,7 @@ struct thread_info {
>  #define _TIF_NOCPUID		(1 << TIF_NOCPUID)
>  #define _TIF_NOTSC		(1 << TIF_NOTSC)
>  #define _TIF_IA32		(1 << TIF_IA32)
> +#define _TIF_SLD		(1 << TIF_SLD)
>  #define _TIF_NOHZ		(1 << TIF_NOHZ)
>  #define _TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG	(1 << TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG)
>  #define _TIF_IO_BITMAP		(1 << TIF_IO_BITMAP)
> @@ -158,9 +160,9 @@ struct thread_info {
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_X86_IOPL_IOPERM
>  # define _TIF_WORK_CTXSW_PREV	(_TIF_WORK_CTXSW| _TIF_USER_RETURN_NOTIFY | \
> -				 _TIF_IO_BITMAP)
> +				 _TIF_IO_BITMAP | _TIF_SLD)
>  #else
> -# define _TIF_WORK_CTXSW_PREV	(_TIF_WORK_CTXSW| _TIF_USER_RETURN_NOTIFY)
> +# define _TIF_WORK_CTXSW_PREV	(_TIF_WORK_CTXSW| _TIF_USER_RETURN_NOTIFY | _TIF_SLD)
>  #endif
>  
>  #define _TIF_WORK_CTXSW_NEXT	(_TIF_WORK_CTXSW)
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/traps.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/traps.h
> index ffa0dc8a535e..6ceab60370f0 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/traps.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/traps.h
> @@ -175,4 +175,5 @@ enum x86_pf_error_code {
>  	X86_PF_INSTR	=		1 << 4,
>  	X86_PF_PK	=		1 << 5,
>  };
> +

Spurious whitespace.

>  #endif /* _ASM_X86_TRAPS_H */
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> index 2e4d90294fe6..39245f61fad0 100644

...

> +bool handle_split_lock(void)

This is a confusing name IMO, e.g. split_lock_detect_enabled() or similar
would be more intuitive.  It'd also avoid the weirdness of having different
semantics for the returns values of handle_split_lock() and
handle_user_split_lock().

> +{
> +	return sld_state != sld_off;
> +}
> +
> +bool handle_user_split_lock(struct pt_regs *regs, long error_code)
> +{
> +	if ((regs->flags & X86_EFLAGS_AC) || sld_state == sld_fatal)
> +		return false;

Maybe add "|| WARN_ON_ONCE(sld_state != sld_off)" to try to prevent the
kernel from going fully into the weeds if a spurious #AC occurs.

> +
> +	pr_alert("#AC: %s/%d took a split_lock trap at address: 0x%lx\n",

pr_warn_ratelimited since it's user controlled?

> +		 current->comm, current->pid, regs->ip);
> +
> +	__sld_msr_set(false);
> +	set_tsk_thread_flag(current, TIF_SLD);
> +	return true;
> +}
> +
> +void switch_sld(struct task_struct *prev)
> +{
> +	__sld_msr_set(true);
> +	clear_tsk_thread_flag(prev, TIF_SLD);
> +}
> +
> +#define SPLIT_LOCK_CPU(model) {X86_VENDOR_INTEL, 6, model, X86_FEATURE_ANY}
> +
> +/*
> + * The following processors have split lock detection feature. But since they
> + * don't have MSR IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES, the feature cannot be enumerated by
> + * the MSR. So enumerate the feature by family and model on these processors.
> + */
> +static const struct x86_cpu_id split_lock_cpu_ids[] __initconst = {
> +	SPLIT_LOCK_CPU(INTEL_FAM6_ICELAKE_X),
> +	SPLIT_LOCK_CPU(INTEL_FAM6_ICELAKE_L),
> +	{}
> +};
> +
> +void __init cpu_set_core_cap_bits(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> +{
> +	u64 ia32_core_caps = 0;
> +
> +	if (cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_CORE_CAPABILITIES)) {
> +		/* Enumerate features reported in IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES MSR. */
> +		rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES, ia32_core_caps);
> +	} else if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR)) {
> +		/* Enumerate split lock detection by family and model. */
> +		if (x86_match_cpu(split_lock_cpu_ids))
> +			ia32_core_caps |= MSR_IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (ia32_core_caps & MSR_IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT)
> +		split_lock_setup();
> +}
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> index 61e93a318983..55d205820f35 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> @@ -654,6 +654,9 @@ void __switch_to_xtra(struct task_struct *prev_p, struct task_struct *next_p)
>  		/* Enforce MSR update to ensure consistent state */
>  		__speculation_ctrl_update(~tifn, tifn);
>  	}
> +
> +	if (tifp & _TIF_SLD)
> +		switch_sld(prev_p);
>  }
>  
>  /*
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c b/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
> index 05da6b5b167b..a933a01f6e40 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/traps.c
> @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@
>  #include <asm/traps.h>
>  #include <asm/desc.h>
>  #include <asm/fpu/internal.h>
> +#include <asm/cpu.h>
>  #include <asm/cpu_entry_area.h>
>  #include <asm/mce.h>
>  #include <asm/fixmap.h>
> @@ -242,7 +243,6 @@ do_trap(int trapnr, int signr, char *str, struct pt_regs *regs,
>  {
>  	struct task_struct *tsk = current;
>  
> -

Whitespace.

>  	if (!do_trap_no_signal(tsk, trapnr, str, regs, error_code))
>  		return;
>  
> @@ -288,9 +288,34 @@ DO_ERROR(X86_TRAP_OLD_MF, SIGFPE,           0, NULL, "coprocessor segment overru
>  DO_ERROR(X86_TRAP_TS,     SIGSEGV,          0, NULL, "invalid TSS",         invalid_TSS)
>  DO_ERROR(X86_TRAP_NP,     SIGBUS,           0, NULL, "segment not present", segment_not_present)
>  DO_ERROR(X86_TRAP_SS,     SIGBUS,           0, NULL, "stack segment",       stack_segment)
> -DO_ERROR(X86_TRAP_AC,     SIGBUS,  BUS_ADRALN, NULL, "alignment check",     alignment_check)
>  #undef IP
>  
> +dotraplinkage void do_alignment_check(struct pt_regs *regs, long error_code)
> +{
> +	unsigned int trapnr = X86_TRAP_AC;
> +	char str[] = "alignment check";

const if you want to keep it.

> +	int signr = SIGBUS;

Don't see any reason for these, e.g. they're not used for do_trap().
trapnr and signr in particular do more harm than good.

> +	RCU_LOCKDEP_WARN(!rcu_is_watching(), "entry code didn't wake RCU");
> +
> +	if (notify_die(DIE_TRAP, str, regs, error_code, trapnr, signr) == NOTIFY_STOP)
> +		return;
> +
> +	if (!handle_split_lock())
> +		return;
> +
> +	if (!user_mode(regs))
> +		die("Split lock detected\n", regs, error_code);
> +
> +	cond_local_irq_enable(regs);
> +
> +	if (handle_user_split_lock(regs, error_code))
> +		return;
> +
> +	do_trap(X86_TRAP_AC, SIGBUS, "alignment check", regs,
> +		error_code, BUS_ADRALN, NULL);
> +}
> +
>  #ifdef CONFIG_VMAP_STACK
>  __visible void __noreturn handle_stack_overflow(const char *message,
>  						struct pt_regs *regs,
> -- 
> 2.21.0
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-14  5:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 145+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-11-21  0:53 [PATCH v10 0/6] Enable split lock detection for real time and debug Fenghua Yu
2019-11-21  0:53 ` [PATCH v10 1/6] x86/msr-index: Add two new MSRs Fenghua Yu
2019-11-21  0:53 ` [PATCH v10 2/6] x86/cpufeatures: Enumerate the IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES MSR Fenghua Yu
2019-11-21  0:53 ` [PATCH v10 3/6] x86/split_lock: Enumerate split lock detection by " Fenghua Yu
2019-11-21  0:53 ` [PATCH v10 4/6] x86/split_lock: Enumerate split lock detection if the IA32_CORE_CAPABILITIES MSR is not supported Fenghua Yu
2019-11-21 22:07   ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-22  0:37     ` Fenghua Yu
2019-11-22  2:13       ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-22  9:46         ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-21  0:53 ` [PATCH v10 5/6] x86/split_lock: Handle #AC exception for split lock Fenghua Yu
2019-11-21 22:10   ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-21 23:14     ` Fenghua Yu
2019-11-21 23:12       ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-21  0:53 ` [PATCH v10 6/6] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by kernel parameter Fenghua Yu
2019-11-21  6:04   ` Ingo Molnar
2019-11-21 13:01     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-21 13:15       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-21 21:51         ` Luck, Tony
2019-11-21 22:24           ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-21 22:29             ` Luck, Tony
2019-11-21 23:18               ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-21 23:53                 ` Fenghua Yu
2019-11-22  1:52                   ` Sean Christopherson
2019-11-22  2:21                     ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-22  2:39                       ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-11-22  2:57                         ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-21 23:55                 ` Luck, Tony
2019-11-22  0:55             ` Luck, Tony
2019-11-22 10:08           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-21 16:14       ` Fenghua Yu
2019-11-21 17:14         ` Ingo Molnar
2019-11-21 17:35         ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-21 17:12       ` Ingo Molnar
2019-11-21 17:34         ` Luck, Tony
2019-11-22 10:51           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-22 15:27             ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-22 17:22               ` Luck, Tony
2019-11-22 20:23                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-22 18:02               ` Luck, Tony
2019-11-22 20:23                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-22 20:42                   ` Fenghua Yu
2019-11-22 21:25                     ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-12-12  8:57                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-12 18:52                         ` Luck, Tony
2019-12-12 19:46                           ` Luck, Tony
2019-12-12 20:01                             ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-12-16 16:21                               ` David Laight
2019-11-22 18:44               ` Sean Christopherson
2019-11-22 20:30                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-23  0:30               ` Luck, Tony
2019-11-25 16:13                 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-12-02 18:20                   ` Luck, Tony
2019-12-12  8:59                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-01-10 19:24                     ` [PATCH v11] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by kernel Luck, Tony
2020-01-14  5:55                       ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2020-01-15 22:27                         ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-15 22:57                           ` Sean Christopherson
2020-01-15 23:48                             ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-22 18:55                             ` [PATCH v12] " Luck, Tony
2020-01-22 19:04                               ` Borislav Petkov
2020-01-22 20:03                                 ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-22 20:55                                   ` Borislav Petkov
2020-01-22 22:42                               ` Arvind Sankar
2020-01-22 22:52                                 ` Arvind Sankar
2020-01-22 23:24                                 ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-23  0:45                                   ` Arvind Sankar
2020-01-23  1:23                                     ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-23  4:21                                       ` Arvind Sankar
2020-01-23 17:15                                         ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-23  3:53                                     ` [PATCH v13] " Luck, Tony
2020-01-23  4:45                                       ` Arvind Sankar
2020-01-23 23:16                                         ` [PATCH v14] " Luck, Tony
2020-01-24 21:36                                           ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-01-25  2:47                                             ` [PATCH v15] " Luck, Tony
2020-01-25 10:44                                               ` Borislav Petkov
2020-01-25 19:55                                                 ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-25 20:12                                                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-01-25 20:33                                                     ` Borislav Petkov
2020-01-25 21:42                                                       ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-25 22:17                                                         ` Borislav Petkov
2020-01-25 20:29                                                   ` Borislav Petkov
2020-01-25 13:41                                               ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-01-25 22:07                                                 ` [PATCH v16] " Luck, Tony
2020-01-25 22:43                                                   ` Mark D Rustad
2020-01-25 23:10                                                     ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-26 17:27                                                       ` Mark D Rustad
2020-01-26 20:05                                                         ` [PATCH v17] " Luck, Tony
2020-01-29 12:31                                                           ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-01-29 15:24                                                           ` [tip: x86/cpu] " tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra (Intel)
2020-02-03 20:41                                                           ` [PATCH v17] " Sean Christopherson
2020-02-06  0:49                                                             ` [PATCH] x86/split_lock: Avoid runtime reads of the TEST_CTRL MSR Luck, Tony
2020-02-06  1:18                                                               ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-02-06 16:46                                                                 ` Luck, Tony
2020-02-06 19:37                                                                   ` Andy Lutomirski
2020-03-03 19:22                                                                     ` Sean Christopherson
2020-02-04  0:04                                                           ` [PATCH v17] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by kernel Sean Christopherson
2020-02-04 12:52                                                             ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-01-26  0:34                                                   ` [PATCH v16] " Andy Lutomirski
2020-01-26 20:01                                                     ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-25 21:25                                               ` [PATCH v15] " Arvind Sankar
2020-01-25 21:50                                                 ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-25 23:51                                                   ` Arvind Sankar
2020-01-26  2:52                                                     ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-27  2:05                                                       ` Tony Luck
2020-01-27  8:04                                                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-01-27  8:36                                                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-01-27 17:35                                                     ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-27  8:02                                                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-13  0:09               ` [PATCH v11] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by kernel parameter Tony Luck
2019-12-13  0:16                 ` Luck, Tony
2019-11-21 17:43         ` [PATCH v10 6/6] " David Laight
2019-11-21 17:51           ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-21 18:53             ` Fenghua Yu
2019-11-21 19:01               ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-21 20:25                 ` Fenghua Yu
2019-11-21 20:19                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-21 19:46               ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-21 20:25               ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-21 21:22                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-22  9:25                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-22 17:48                     ` Luck, Tony
2019-11-22 20:31                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-22 21:23                         ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-12-11 17:52                           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-11 18:12                             ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-12-11 22:34                               ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-12 19:40                                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-12-16  9:59                                   ` David Laight
2019-12-16 17:22                                     ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-12-16 17:45                                       ` David Laight
2019-12-16 18:06                                         ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-12-17 10:03                                           ` David Laight
2019-12-11 18:44                             ` Luck, Tony
2019-12-11 22:39                               ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-12 10:36                                 ` David Laight
2019-12-12 13:04                                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-12-12 16:02                                     ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-12-12 16:23                                       ` David Laight
2019-12-12 16:29                                     ` David Laight
2019-11-21 19:56             ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-21 21:01               ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-11-22  9:36                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-22  9:46             ` David Laight
2019-11-22 20:32               ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-21  8:00   ` Peter Zijlstra

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=20200114055521.GI14928@linux.intel.com \
    --to=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
    --cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome