From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B56F6C433EF for ; Tue, 21 Sep 2021 06:07:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81402610A0 for ; Tue, 21 Sep 2021 06:07:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229820AbhIUGJC (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Sep 2021 02:09:02 -0400 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de ([195.135.220.29]:43956 "EHLO smtp-out2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229614AbhIUGI6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Sep 2021 02:08:58 -0400 Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23F031FE5E; Tue, 21 Sep 2021 06:07:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1632204449; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=EMk+GC3syGEDD553AiTSALMMtJS88qIkMD4XQpesw/U=; b=BPOzHiGi7qbpQI4YeMZ+YMIH5PQfWTjB8ZPY+sw9YgrPLJWpacvvq6Vl2raYXH45sR6UmK 3zR0PwIrVKC4MMQZ7Kpzh4xYPpyLT/ZXYoF9O1GI+dcwXOYqrzntzA6U2ops6i8IrIB57w vJLXrK9h7rLFjD4DDRLFOfuq3szsW/A= Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9A9A13B93; Tue, 21 Sep 2021 06:07:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id a3XpM6B2SWEwZQAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Tue, 21 Sep 2021 06:07:28 +0000 To: Oleksandr Andrushchenko , Stefano Stabellini Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com" , "julien@xen.org" , "jbeulich@suse.com" , Anastasiia Lukianenko , Oleksandr Andrushchenko References: <20210917130123.1764493-1-andr2000@gmail.com> <35e2e36a-bade-d801-faa1-c9953678bb9d@suse.com> <7f873e38-0362-1f60-7347-a490c9dc8572@epam.com> <0f31a1bf-62b1-1aef-7b0f-34a1f6985fdb@suse.com> <82e55df9-74d3-6365-ab29-2bdfc4b74a1f@epam.com> From: Juergen Gross Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen-pciback: allow compiling on other archs than x86 Message-ID: <9b4962de-61ef-44dc-ffca-c54dd7990c6a@suse.com> Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2021 08:07:28 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <82e55df9-74d3-6365-ab29-2bdfc4b74a1f@epam.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="DlvyvRDyKovEmV7DXh8WfVHTPRjI52Ka8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --DlvyvRDyKovEmV7DXh8WfVHTPRjI52Ka8 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="HJdGdPYCV6JJoHpoUhOSa2P0UnPvIQRni"; protected-headers="v1" From: Juergen Gross To: Oleksandr Andrushchenko , Stefano Stabellini Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com" , "julien@xen.org" , "jbeulich@suse.com" , Anastasiia Lukianenko , Oleksandr Andrushchenko Message-ID: <9b4962de-61ef-44dc-ffca-c54dd7990c6a@suse.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen-pciback: allow compiling on other archs than x86 References: <20210917130123.1764493-1-andr2000@gmail.com> <35e2e36a-bade-d801-faa1-c9953678bb9d@suse.com> <7f873e38-0362-1f60-7347-a490c9dc8572@epam.com> <0f31a1bf-62b1-1aef-7b0f-34a1f6985fdb@suse.com> <82e55df9-74d3-6365-ab29-2bdfc4b74a1f@epam.com> In-Reply-To: <82e55df9-74d3-6365-ab29-2bdfc4b74a1f@epam.com> --HJdGdPYCV6JJoHpoUhOSa2P0UnPvIQRni Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------D23FCEDD6DEB2FBE19FCAC30" Content-Language: en-US This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------D23FCEDD6DEB2FBE19FCAC30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 21.09.21 07:51, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >=20 > On 21.09.21 08:20, Juergen Gross wrote: >> On 21.09.21 01:16, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> On Mon, 20 Sep 2021, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >>>> On 20.09.21 14:30, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>> On 20.09.21 07:23, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: >>>>>> Hello, Stefano! >>>>>> >>>>>> On 18.09.21 00:45, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Oleksandr, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why do you want to enable pciback on ARM? Is it only to "disable"= a PCI >>>>>>> device in Dom0 so that it can be safely assigned to a DomU? >>>>>> Not only that >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am asking because actually I don't think we want to enable the = PV PCI >>>>>>> backend feature of pciback on ARM, right? That would clash with t= he PCI >>>>>>> assignment work you have been doing in Xen. They couldn't both wo= rk at >>>>>>> the same time. >>>>>> Correct, it is not used >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If we only need pciback to "park" a device in Dom0, wouldn't it b= e >>>>>>> possible and better to use pci-stub instead? >>>>>> >>>>>> Not only that, so pci-stub is not enough >>>>>> >>>>>> The functionality which is implemented by the pciback and the tool= stack >>>>>> and which is relevant/missing/needed for ARM: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. pciback is used as a database for assignable PCI devices, e.g. = xl >>>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 pci-assignable-{add|remove|list} manipu= lates that list. So, whenever the >>>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 toolstack needs to know which PCI devic= es can be passed through it reads >>>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 that from the relevant sysfs entries of= the pciback. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. pciback is used to hold the unbound PCI devices, e.g. when pass= ing through >>>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 a PCI device it needs to be unbound fro= m the relevant device driver and bound >>>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 to pciback (strictly speaking it is not= required that the device is bound to >>>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 pciback, but pciback is again used as a= database of the passed through PCI >>>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 devices, so we can re-bind the devices = back to their original drivers when >>>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0 guest domain shuts down) >>>>>> >>>>>> 3. Device reset >>>>>> >>>>>> We have previously discussed on xen-devel ML possible solutions to= that as from the >>>>>> above we see that pciback functionality is going to be only partia= lly used on Arm. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please see [1] and [2]: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. It is not acceptable to manage the assignable list in Xen itsel= f >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. pciback can be split into two parts: PCI assignable/bind/reset = handling and >>>>>> the rest like vPCI etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> 3. pcifront is not used on Arm >>>>> >>>>> It is neither in x86 PVH/HVM guests. >>>> Didn't know that, thank you for pointing >>>>> >>>>>> So, limited use of the pciback is one of the bricks used to enable= PCI passthrough >>>>>> on Arm. It was enough to just re-structure the driver and have it = run on Arm to achieve >>>>>> all the goals above. >>>>>> >>>>>> If we still think it is desirable to break the pciback driver into= "common" and "pcifront specific" >>>>>> parts then it can be done, yet the patch is going to be the very f= irst brick in that building. >>>>> >>>>> Doing this split should be done, as the pcifront specific part coul= d be >>>>> omitted on x86, too, in case no PV guests using PCI passthrough hav= e to >>>>> be supported. >>>> Agree, that the final solution should have the driver split >>>>> >>>>>> So, I think this patch is still going to be needed besides which d= irection we take. >>>>> >>>>> Some kind of this patch, yes. It might look different in case the s= plit >>>>> is done first. >>>>> >>>>> I don't mind doing it in either sequence. >>>>> >>>> With this patch we have Arm on the same page as the above mentioned = x86 guests, >>>> >>>> e.g. the driver has unused code, but yet allows Arm to function now.= >>>> >>>> At this stage of PCI passthrough on Arm it is yet enough. Long term,= when >>>> >>>> the driver gets split, Arm will benefit from that split too, but unf= ortunately I do not >>>> >>>> have enough bandwidth for that piece of work at the moment. >>> >>> That's fair and I don't want to scope-creep this simple patch asking = for >>> an enormous rework. At the same time I don't think we should enable t= he >>> whole of pciback on ARM because it would be erroneous and confusing. >=20 > As the first stage before the driver is split or ifdef's used - can we = take the patch > as is now? In either way we chose this needs to be done, e.g. enable co= mpiling > for other architectures and common code move. Fine with me in principle. I need to take a more thorough look at the patch, though. >=20 >>> >>> I am wonder if there is a simple: >>> >>> if (!xen_pv_domain()) >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 return; >>> >>> That we could add in a couple of places in pciback to stop it from >>> initializing the parts we don't care about. Something along these lin= es >>> (untested and probably incomplete). >>> >>> What do you guys think? >> >> Uh no, not in this way, please. This will kill pci passthrough on x86 >> with dom0 running as PVH. I don't think this is working right now, but= >> adding more code making it even harder to work should be avoided. >> >>> diff --git a/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/xenbus.c b/drivers/xen/xen-pciba= ck/xenbus.c >>> index da34ce85dc88..991ba0a9b359 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/xenbus.c >>> +++ b/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/xenbus.c >>> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ >>> =C2=A0 #include >>> =C2=A0 #include >>> =C2=A0 #include >>> +#include >>> =C2=A0 #include "pciback.h" >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 #define INVALID_EVTCHN_IRQ=C2=A0 (-1) >>> @@ -685,8 +686,12 @@ static int xen_pcibk_xenbus_probe(struct xenbus_= device *dev, >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2= =A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 const struct xenbus_device_id *id) >>> =C2=A0 { >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 int err =3D 0; >>> -=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 struct xen_pcibk_device *pdev =3D alloc_pdev(dev)= ; >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 struct xen_pcibk_device *pdev; >>> + >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 if (!xen_pv_domain()) >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 return 0; >>> =C2=A0 +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 pdev =3D alloc_pdev(dev); >> >> This hunk isn't needed, as with bailing out of xen_pcibk_xenbus_regist= er >> early will result in xen_pcibk_xenbus_probe never being called. >> >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 if (pdev =3D=3D NULL) { >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 err =3D -ENOM= EM; >>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 xenbus_dev_fa= tal(dev, err, >>> @@ -743,6 +748,9 @@ const struct xen_pcibk_backend *__read_mostly xen= _pcibk_backend; >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 int __init xen_pcibk_xenbus_register(void) >>> =C2=A0 { >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 if (!xen_pv_domain()) >>> +=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 return 0; >>> + >> >> Use #ifdef CONFIG_X86 instead. >=20 > The title of this patch says that we want to allow this driver for othe= r archs > and now we want to introduce "#ifdef CONFIG_X86" which doesn't sound > right with that respect. Instead, we may want having something like a > dedicated gate for this, e.g. "#ifdef CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_BACKEND_SUPP_PV= " > or something which is architecture agnostic. Something like that, yes. But I'd rather use CONFIG_XEN_PCIDEV_BACKEND acting as this gate and introduce CONFIG_XEN_PCI_STUB for the stub functionality needed on Arm. XEN_PCIDEV_BACKEND would depend on X86 and select XEN_PCI_STUB, while on Arm XEN_PCI_STUB could be configured if wanted. The splitting of the driver can still be done later. > Gating also means that we are not thinking about splitting the backend = driver into > two different ones, e.g. one for "common" code and one for PV stuff. > Otherwise this ifdefery won't be needed. I just wanted to avoid the xen_pv_domain() tests creeping in, as they are wrong IMO. Juergen --------------D23FCEDD6DEB2FBE19FCAC30 Content-Type: application/pgp-keys; name="OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: OpenPGP public key Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc" -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- xsBNBFOMcBYBCACgGjqjoGvbEouQZw/ToiBg9W98AlM2QHV+iNHsEs7kxWhKMjrioyspZKOBy= cWx w3ie3j9uvg9EOB3aN4xiTv4qbnGiTr3oJhkB1gsb6ToJQZ8uxGq2kaV2KL9650I1SJvedYm8O= f8Z d621lSmoKOwlNClALZNew72NjJLEzTalU1OdT7/i1TXkH09XSSI8mEQ/ouNcMvIJNwQpd369y= 9bf IhWUiVXEK7MlRgUG6MvIj6Y3Am/BBLUVbDa4+gmzDC9ezlZkTZG2t14zWPvxXP3FAp2pkW0xq= G7/ 377qptDmrk42GlSKN4z76ELnLxussxc7I2hx18NUcbP8+uty4bMxABEBAAHNHEp1ZXJnZW4gR= 3Jv c3MgPGpnQHBmdXBmLm5ldD7CwHkEEwECACMFAlOMcBYCGwMHCwkIBwMCAQYVCAIJCgsEFgIDA= QIe AQIXgAAKCRCw3p3WKL8TL0KdB/93FcIZ3GCNwFU0u3EjNbNjmXBKDY4FUGNQH2lvWAUy+dnyT= hpw dtF/jQ6j9RwE8VP0+NXcYpGJDWlNb9/JmYqLiX2Q3TyevpB0CA3dbBQp0OW0fgCetToGIQrg0= MbD 1C/sEOv8Mr4NAfbauXjZlvTj30H2jO0u+6WGM6nHwbh2l5O8ZiHkH32iaSTfN7Eu5RnNVUJbv= oPH Z8SlM4KWm8rG+lIkGurqqu5gu8q8ZMKdsdGC4bBxdQKDKHEFExLJK/nRPFmAuGlId1E3fe10v= 5QL +qHI3EIPtyfE7i9Hz6rVwi7lWKgh7pe0ZvatAudZ+JNIlBKptb64FaiIOAWDCx1SzR9KdWVyZ= 2Vu IEdyb3NzIDxqZ3Jvc3NAc3VzZS5jb20+wsB5BBMBAgAjBQJTjHCvAhsDBwsJCAcDAgEGFQgCC= QoL BBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQsN6d1ii/Ey/HmQf/RtI7kv5A2PS4RF7HoZhPVPogNVbC4YA6lW7Dr= Wf0 teC0RR3MzXfy6pJ+7KLgkqMlrAbN/8Dvjoz78X+5vhH/rDLa9BuZQlhFmvcGtCF8eR0T1v0nC= /nu AFVGy+67q2DH8As3KPu0344TBDpAvr2uYM4tSqxK4DURx5INz4ZZ0WNFHcqsfvlGJALDeE0Lh= ITT d9jLzdDad1pQSToCnLl6SBJZjDOX9QQcyUigZFtCXFst4dlsvddrxyqT1f17+2cFSdu7+ynLm= XBK 7abQ3rwJY8SbRO2iRulogc5vr/RLMMlscDAiDkaFQWLoqHHOdfO9rURssHNN8WkMnQfvUewRz= 80h SnVlcmdlbiBHcm9zcyA8amdyb3NzQG5vdmVsbC5jb20+wsB5BBMBAgAjBQJTjHDXAhsDBwsJC= AcD AgEGFQgCCQoLBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQsN6d1ii/Ey8PUQf/ehmgCI9jB9hlgexLvgOtf7PJn= FOX gMLdBQgBlVPO3/D9R8LtF9DBAFPNhlrsfIG/SqICoRCqUcJ96Pn3P7UUinFG/I0ECGF4EvTE1= jnD kfJZr6jrbjgyoZHiw/4BNwSTL9rWASyLgqlA8u1mf+c2yUwcGhgkRAd1gOwungxcwzwqgljf0= N51 N5JfVRHRtyfwq/ge+YEkDGcTU6Y0sPOuj4Dyfm8fJzdfHNQsWq3PnczLVELStJNdapwPOoE+l= otu fe3AM2vAEYJ9rTz3Cki4JFUsgLkHFqGZarrPGi1eyQcXeluldO3m91NK/1xMI3/+8jbO0tsn1= tqS EUGIJi7ox80eSnVlcmdlbiBHcm9zcyA8amdyb3NzQHN1c2UuZGU+wsB5BBMBAgAjBQJTjHDrA= hsD BwsJCAcDAgEGFQgCCQoLBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQsN6d1ii/Ey+LhQf9GL45eU5vOowA2u5N3= g3O ZUEBmDHVVbqMtzwlmNC4k9Kx39r5s2vcFl4tXqW7g9/ViXYuiDXb0RfUpZiIUW89siKrkzmQ5= dM7 wRqzgJpJwK8Bn2MIxAKArekWpiCKvBOB/Cc+3EXE78XdlxLyOi/NrmSGRIov0karw2RzMNOu5= D+j LRZQd1Sv27AR+IP3I8U4aqnhLpwhK7MEy9oCILlgZ1QZe49kpcumcZKORmzBTNh30FVKK1Evm= V2x AKDoaEOgQB4iFQLhJCdP1I5aSgM5IVFdn7v5YgEYuJYx37IoN1EblHI//x/e2AaIHpzK5h88N= Eaw QsaNRpNSrcfbFmAg987ATQRTjHAWAQgAyzH6AOODMBjgfWE9VeCgsrwH3exNAU32gLq2xvjpW= nHI s98ndPUDpnoxWQugJ6MpMncr0xSwFmHEgnSEjK/PAjppgmyc57BwKII3sV4on+gDVFJR6Y8ZR= wgn BC5mVM6JjQ5xDk8WRXljExRfUX9pNhdE5eBOZJrDRoLUmmjDtKzWaDhIg/+1Hzz93X4fCQkNV= bVF LELU9bMaLPBG/x5q4iYZ2k2ex6d47YE1ZFdMm6YBYMOljGkZKwYde5ldM9mo45mmwe0icXKLk= pEd IXKTZeKDO+Hdv1aqFuAcccTg9RXDQjmwhC3yEmrmcfl0+rPghO0Iv3OOImwTEe4co3c1mwARA= QAB wsBfBBgBAgAJBQJTjHAWAhsMAAoJELDendYovxMvQ/gH/1ha96vm4P/L+bQpJwrZ/dneZcmEw= Tbe 8YFsw2V/Buv6Z4Mysln3nQK5ZadD534CF7TDVft7fC4tU4PONxF5D+/tvgkPfDAfF77zy2AH1= vJz Q1fOU8lYFpZXTXIHb+559UqvIB8AdgR3SAJGHHt4RKA0F7f5ipYBBrC6cyXJyyoprT10EMvU8= VGi wXvTyJz3fjoYsdFzpWPlJEBRMedCot60g5dmbdrZ5DWClAr0yau47zpWj3enf1tLWaqcsuylW= svi uGjKGw7KHQd3bxALOknAp4dN3QwBYCKuZ7AddY9yjynVaD5X7nF9nO5BjR/i1DG86lem3iBDX= zXs ZDn8R38=3D =3D2wuH -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- --------------D23FCEDD6DEB2FBE19FCAC30-- --HJdGdPYCV6JJoHpoUhOSa2P0UnPvIQRni-- --DlvyvRDyKovEmV7DXh8WfVHTPRjI52Ka8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="OpenPGP_signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="OpenPGP_signature" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- wsB5BAABCAAjFiEEhRJncuj2BJSl0Jf3sN6d1ii/Ey8FAmFJdqAFAwAAAAAACgkQsN6d1ii/Ey80 lAf/ag3+BoLQ5HT8A5VbqdaqsjYmqkN/wxhA5YhgRadB54IBkZ4K+bB+lbIfFKnSO2cVoB9JFdvf AiPTc8Urmyigf/3s9GeJzUxfseJ7CoxiiH+aW6KcOmPvGb/dHii/oylqt/EHwKIeY/r41F9OX1AX W2ksbdxBbD94bFWhddBMjHURsHbQskdhzeK66E77MKKBr48TOFha+ibsxrbMFqDFEQEF5Z2Ree5j c+onWJI9PXFJmnPCbeqYw4VIht55u2SR0j9fOtBTo95Ni4MPR3YctL+zZ8lfn8mu1apUrT6ddNXv 0OmdXxv8bP7ldl17FUE0OVeZZTI9kUvjZIZZUZWBIQ== =C9P/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --DlvyvRDyKovEmV7DXh8WfVHTPRjI52Ka8--