Received: by 2002:a05:7412:5112:b0:fa:6e18:a558 with SMTP id fm18csp312206rdb; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 23:35:18 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFBSdanqdGebqERAkquiSI+8GfmJtmG6TvhW46TS0BaOWuEt7Ct8BabGh/+IZyoV3FzXAMA X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:2454:b0:199:f2ef:8282 with SMTP id t20-20020a056a20245400b00199f2ef8282mr6012778pzc.100.1705995318248; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 23:35:18 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1705995318; cv=pass; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=NFvGzoEEU+vFXevcvEKEeodMpIqp++qnDqTmrjMqIQZgOErQV598+Jq5AQoubwFpmM GdMPINYsvBJxRjDCyWYgBlD5bJVDur1SmQp2y6HVjo7n6aXyeYVNC4J2W20DyEjqfPly wGKk574SAPRYZi6GBXrpaSVabIr5LAHrNRCJx4dsq6+rDm8uPP+USMz7oe0lamAVg4+a ckodHkjHQce3XDiJWOP21Tf35cvZVCiCKJiHTIFqkl0Do5BlcOtwXKHvxWJ99RPY9LJT kbebMZYFKhzl7ra7chGBT9q83lFCUihCXYPpKdp+xDZQm//LjGq4G/PMl85Ud1eW8QhT ypIw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-id:precedence :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=AtCzlQv5a1pDgRDF5wkeFc/NVOJOPrC9kdbXvaJBbPo=; fh=L6zRVScbS9dILlizynjeB54GpvKir0T5+5eIucn0kSc=; b=faRgxrPo+GLsDUPr4TyX6A9h3TSCXJ+P4cN+CyXqQfPOUsshjAyMSGjUmEc8tZUiFw +B8fcalhf/OuCiflecCgQ4Afz9Y5CGSQk4eHOyWgBOJvIwPqQt3pWXeqW5OON1wlaQz4 p+sasgsEx4NusCLG1416wTEv74gQKQ1F1Y6nRKmXASmcXk5Jtp2OCKLaXzlZ9fdTgv5x GG70UMMojRlN3CDkApAEPCi03cBfqhnGd6iX5xXmRhSmXx85diRH9Y9X3jmLndjgJXP1 cM8HHd65hy21EuZRzmTheKXWQMQARe3UOlLy8bMG9zyFzR6ojChxfIUNW5Cj2Sk2YxM/ lBKg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; mx.google.com; arc=pass (i=1 spf=pass spfdomain=loongson.cn); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-34826-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-34826-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org" Return-Path: Received: from sv.mirrors.kernel.org (sv.mirrors.kernel.org. [139.178.88.99]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f22-20020a635556000000b005c1ce3c9617si9065394pgm.901.2024.01.22.23.35.18 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 22 Jan 2024 23:35:18 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-34826-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; arc=pass (i=1 spf=pass spfdomain=loongson.cn); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-34826-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-34826-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org" Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sv.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D57C32827F8 for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 07:35:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36D8456752; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 07:34:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.loongson.cn (mail.loongson.cn [114.242.206.163]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D688152F92; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 07:34:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=114.242.206.163 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705995281; cv=none; b=Y6gdSdrRFNyloLiUjkgMRnpi0DikC6cXXstGjXbnxEATYQVp6xqlqHb2q9jQ+PE3looZC1cMLI79r/NYAV2KxWtrM6sxFW4N1dZiyTYTpmlS57IqqP5qMbT/axFb8G+xKRAKDHWDp9dT2Us0f7pLoqj14UNAF8AfB/WWpPiTix8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705995281; c=relaxed/simple; bh=eHq7+G12RedCjm4a0R1V7SQYLR3t0jumEZymcYdJd78=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=QrGQvr2z/bMcPeS7102EWLU9EqozwcNerSB/gA3nc+jVvdXpiSgEuFFEm3YUqcKB6sKbwO3VbBjMvas5EEUMuQbJHwrKF+MO3WsrJfXFiuTQkwd2RUT7LRiMC9m2h3zoK/qj17etsGmUfi3R2QEyfHVCEBoRjnj5hnre/zg47UQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=loongson.cn; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=loongson.cn; arc=none smtp.client-ip=114.242.206.163 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=loongson.cn Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=loongson.cn Received: from loongson.cn (unknown [111.9.175.10]) by gateway (Coremail) with SMTP id _____8DxdfFDjKhlgHMBAA--.7280S3; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 10:26:11 +0800 (CST) Received: from Board-3A3000 (unknown [111.9.175.10]) by localhost.localdomain (Coremail) with SMTP id AQAAf8DxzM5AjKhlUnwHAA--.1588S2; Thu, 18 Jan 2024 10:26:10 +0800 (CST) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2024 10:26:08 +0800 From: Huang Pei To: Mike Rapoport Cc: Yajun Deng , Jiaxun Yang , linux-mm@kvack.org, Bibo Mao , linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, Paul Burton , Li Xuefeng , Yang Tiezhu , Gao Juxin , Huacai Chen , Thomas Bogendoerfer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: memblock_reserve for unadded region (was: [PATCH] MIPS: loongson64: fix boot failure) Message-ID: <20240118022608.m4dzunfiogkdoazi@Board-3A3000> References: <731134fd-4b3d-418c-84ee-80646bffcc01@flygoat.com> <20240116122304.qwzy7san2vgspt2x@Board-3A3000> <3fc2f75e-d163-1ad1-009a-0e4538011885@linux.dev> <20240117030113.gs2fjs6vydthsc6l@Board-3A3000> <234ddaeb-5988-858d-6ba1-0fef90fb7a87@linux.dev> <20240117035910.453ofvotbvkzje6k@Board-3A3000> <20240117074546.gm7lejjt7whjtwgr@Board-3A3000> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-CM-TRANSID:AQAAf8DxzM5AjKhlUnwHAA--.1588S2 X-CM-SenderInfo: xkxd0whshlqz5rrqw2lrqou0/ X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Uk129KBj93XoWfJr18XFyDur1kGrWUAF1rXwc_yoWkGF48pr 1fJF17CrW8Jr18Jr4Utr15Jr1jyw1YyF1UXr1DJr18Xr1qyr13Xr1UJr18WFyDJrW8Jr12 qr1UJr12vr1UAwcCm3ZEXasCq-sJn29KB7ZKAUJUUUU7529EdanIXcx71UUUUU7KY7ZEXa sCq-sGcSsGvfJ3Ic02F40EFcxC0VAKzVAqx4xG6I80ebIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy29KBjDU 0xBIdaVrnRJUUUBjb4IE77IF4wAFF20E14v26r1j6r4UM7CY07I20VC2zVCF04k26cxKx2 IYs7xG6rWj6s0DM7CIcVAFz4kK6r1Y6r17M28lY4IEw2IIxxk0rwA2F7IY1VAKz4vEj48v e4kI8wA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Gr0_Xr1l84ACjcxK6xIIjxv20xvEc7CjxVAFwI 0_Gr0_Cr1l84ACjcxK6I8E87Iv67AKxVWxJVW8Jr1l84ACjcxK6I8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v2 6r4UJVWxJr1ln4kS14v26r1Y6r17M2AIxVAIcxkEcVAq07x20xvEncxIr21l57IF6xkI12 xvs2x26I8E6xACxx1l5I8CrVACY4xI64kE6c02F40Ex7xfMcIj6xIIjxv20xvE14v26r12 6r1DMcIj6I8E87Iv67AKxVWUJVW8JwAm72CE4IkC6x0Yz7v_Jr0_Gr1lF7xvr2IY64vIr4 1lc7CjxVAaw2AFwI0_JF0_Jw1l42xK82IYc2Ij64vIr41l4I8I3I0E4IkC6x0Yz7v_Jr0_ Gr1l4IxYO2xFxVAFwI0_Jrv_JF1lx2IqxVAqx4xG67AKxVWUJVWUGwC20s026x8GjcxK67 AKxVWUGVWUWwC2zVAF1VAY17CE14v26r1q6r43MIIYrxkI7VAKI48JMIIF0xvE2Ix0cI8I cVAFwI0_Jr0_JF4lIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY6xkF7I0E14v26r1j6r4UMIIF0xvE42xK8VAvwI 8IcIk0rVWUJVWUCwCI42IY6I8E87Iv67AKxVWUJVW8JwCI42IY6I8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v2 6r1j6r4UYxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0xZFpf9x07jOiSdUUUUU= X-Gw-Check: 3048a62aa90648ec On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 01:08:48PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote: > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 03:45:46PM +0800, Huang Pei wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 08:46:34AM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 11:59:10AM +0800, Huang Pei wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 11:17:18AM +0800, Yajun Deng wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 2024/1/17 11:01, Huang Pei wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 10:20:00AM +0800, Yajun Deng wrote: > > > > > > > On 2024/1/16 20:23, Huang Pei wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 10:39:04AM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 02:08:21PM +0000, Jiaxun Yang wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi mm folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just a quick question, what is the expected behavior of memblock_reserve > > > > > > > > > > a region that is not added to memblock with memblock_add? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm unable to find any documentation about memblock_reserve in comments and > > > > > > > > > > boot-time-mm, but as per my understanding to the code, this should be a > > > > > > > > > > legit usage? > > > > > > > > > Yes, memblock allows reserving memory that was not added to memblock with > > > > > > > > > memblock_add(). > > > > > > > > I think arch/platform specific code should fix this bug, like, > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > //for loongson64 > > > > > > > > memblock_set_node(0, 1ULL << 44, &memblock.reserved, 0); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or maybe memblock provide something like memblock_reserve_node > > > > > > > Hi pei, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can you test the following patch to see if it fixes this bug? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/mm/mm_init.c b/mm/mm_init.c > > > > > > > index 2c19f5515e36..97721d99fdce 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/mm/mm_init.c > > > > > > > +++ b/mm/mm_init.c > > > > > > > @@ -708,6 +708,9 @@ static void __meminit init_reserved_page(unsigned long > > > > > > > pfn, int nid) > > > > > > >         pg_data_t *pgdat; > > > > > > >         int zid; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +       if (unlikely(nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || nid >= MAX_NUMNODES)) > > > > > > > +               nid = early_pfn_to_nid(pfn); > > > > > > > + > > > > > > >         if (early_page_initialised(pfn, nid)) > > > > > > >                 return; > > > > > > IMO this will fix the bug. Before 61167ad5fecd we had nid = first_online_node > > > for reserved pages that didn't have nid set in memblock.reserved. After > > > 61167ad5fecd we try to initialize these pages with MAX_NUMNODES and > > > obviously crash when accessing node structure. > > > > > > I think that the check for a valid nid should be moved to > > > memmap_init_reserved_pages() though. An entire reserved region will have > > > nid set to MAX_NUMNODES, so there is no point to check every page in it. > > > > > > > > > I do not think this fix set the right nid, ONLY arch/platform know that > > > > > > nid > > > > > > Why does it matter to have the right nid in a reserved page that is not > > > part of usable memory? > > > > > IMO, if a reserved page DO have a valid nid, and archs knows that, archs > > should set it right, and this is just the case of loongson64(and > > loongarch). I will set the nid for reserved page on loongson64, just like what loongarch did. > An arch may choose to set nids for reserved regions that are never added to > memblock.memory, but mm shouldn't crash if it didn't. > I agree. > > > That's true that only arch knows on which node those reserved pages are, > > > but core mm does not care about reserved pages that are not in memory. > > > > > > > > > int __meminit early_pfn_to_nid(unsigned long pfn) > > > > > > { > > > > > > static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(early_pfn_lock); > > > > > > int nid; > > > > > > > > > > > > spin_lock(&early_pfn_lock); > > > > > > nid = __early_pfn_to_nid(pfn, > > > > > > &early_pfnnid_cache); > > > > > > if (nid < 0) > > > > > > //!!!first_online_node MAY NOT be the node the pfn belong to!!! > > > > > > nid = first_online_node; > > > > > > > > > > > > spin_unlock(&early_pfn_lock); > > > > > > > > > > > > return > > > > > > nid; > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Okay, I don't think this bug is caused by commit 61167ad5fecd ("mm: pass nid > > > > > to reserve_bootmem_region()"), > > > > > > > > > > because even if you revert this commit, it will still get nid by > > > > > early_pfn_to_nid(). Did I get that right? > > > > > > > > Yes, more accurately, this bug is exposed by commit 61167ad5fecd. My > > > > previous fix is based on presumptions that memory_reserve should reserve memory > > > > added by memblock_add{,_node}, if going across this limitation, there need > > > > to set the valid nid for reserved memory region. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In practical we run into uninitialized nid of reserved block problem, should > > > > > > > > > > we fix it > > > > > > > > > > in our usage, or on memblock side? > > > > > > > > > Apparently it's a bug in memblock :( > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you revert 61167ad5fecd ("mm: pass nid to reserve_bootmem_region()") > > > > > > > > > does the issue disappear? > > > > > > > > Yes, I git bisect this commit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But I don't think it is a bug in memblock. IMO, memblock_reserve under > > > > > > > > NUMA set nid of reserved region to MAX_NUMNODES, which is the point > > > > > > > > that cause the "memblock_get_region_node from memmap_init_reserved_pages " > > > > > > > > passing a invalid node id(aka MAX_NUMNODES) to "reserver_bootmem_region > > > > > > > > -> init_reserved_page -> early_pfn_to_nid". If arch-specific code DOES NOT > > > > > > > > initialize the nid of reserved region(only it know that), or the reserved > > > > > > > > region NOT within a memblock added by memblock_add, memblock can not > > > > > > > > give a valid node id to the reserved region. Commit 61167ad5fecd ("mm: pass nid to > > > > > > > > reserve_bootmem_region()") just reveals the embarrassment case by an > > > > > > > > out of bound memory access. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 在 2023/12/25 09:30, Huang Pei 写道: > > > > > > > > > > > Since commit 61167ad5fecd("mm: pass nid to reserve_bootmem_region()), > > > > > > > > > > > loongson64 booting failed with CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT like > > > > > > > > > > > this: > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > Call Trace: > > > > > > > > > > > [] reserve_bootmem_region+0xa8/0x184 > > > > > > > > > > > [] memblock_free_all+0x104/0x2a8 > > > > > > > > > > > [] mem_init+0x84/0x94 > > > > > > > > > > > [] mm_core_init+0xf8/0x308 > > > > > > > > > > > [] start_kernel+0x43c/0x86c > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Code: 10400028 2402fff0 de420000 0203182b 14600022 > > > > > > > > > > > 64420070 00003025 24040003 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- > > > > > > > > > > > Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! > > > > > > > > > > > ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task! ]--- > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The root cause is no memory region "0x0-0x1fffff" paired with > > > > > > > > > > > memory-reserved region "0x0-0x1fffff" and "0x0-0xfff", with "memblock > > > > > > > > > > > =debug": > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > memory[0x0] [0x0000000000200000-0x000000000effffff], > > > > > > > > > > > 0x000000000ee00000 bytes on node 0 flags: 0x0 !!!!here > > > > > > > > > > > memory[0x1] [0x0000000090000000-0x00000000fdffffff], > > > > > > > > > > > 0x000000006e000000 bytes on node 0 flags: 0x0 > > > > > > > > > > > memory[0x2] [0x0000000100000000-0x000000027fffffff], > > > > > > > > > > > 0x0000000180000000 bytes on node 0 flags: 0x0 > > > > > > > > > > > memory[0x3] [0x0000100000000000-0x000010000fffffff], > > > > > > > > > > > 0x0000000010000000 bytes on node 1 flags: 0x0 > > > > > > > > > > > memory[0x4] [0x0000100090000000-0x000010027fffffff], > > > > > > > > > > > 0x00000001f0000000 bytes on node 1 flags: 0x0 > > > > > > > > > > > reserved.cnt = 0x1f > > > > > > > > > > > reserved[0x0] [0x0000000000000000-0x000000000190c80a], > > > > > > > > > > > 0x000000000190c80b bytes flags: 0x0 !!!!oops 0x0-0x1fffff not in memory[0] > > > > > > > > > > > reserved[0x1] [0x000000000190c810-0x000000000190eea3], > > > > > > > > > > > 0x0000000000002694 bytes flags: 0x0 > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It caused memory-reserved region "0x0-0x1fffff" without valid node id > > > > > > > > > > > in "memblock_get_region_node" from "memmap_init_reserved_pages", lead to > > > > > > > > > > > "reserve_bootmem_region-> init_reserved_page -> early_pfn_to_nid()" > > > > > > > > > > > accessing "node_data" out of bound. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To fix this bug, we should remove unnecessary memory block reservation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +. no need to reserve 0x0-0x1fffff below kernel loading address, since > > > > > > > > > > > it is not registered by "memblock_add_node" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +. no need to reserve 0x0-0xfff for exception handling if it is not > > > > > > > > > > > registered by "memblock_add" either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fixes: commit 61167ad5fecd("mm: pass nid to reserve_bootmem_region()) > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Huang Pei > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > arch/mips/kernel/traps.c | 3 ++- > > > > > > > > > > > arch/mips/loongson64/numa.c | 2 -- > > > > > > > > > > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/traps.c b/arch/mips/kernel/traps.c > > > > > > > > > > > index 246c6a6b0261..9b632b4c10c3 100644 > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/arch/mips/kernel/traps.c > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/arch/mips/kernel/traps.c > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -2007,7 +2007,8 @@ unsigned long vi_handlers[64]; > > > > > > > > > > > void reserve_exception_space(phys_addr_t addr, unsigned long size) > > > > > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > > > > - memblock_reserve(addr, size); > > > > > > > > > > > + if(memblock_is_region_memory(addr, size)) > > > > > > > > > > > + memblock_reserve(addr, size); > > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > void __init *set_except_vector(int n, void *addr) > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/mips/loongson64/numa.c b/arch/mips/loongson64/numa.c > > > > > > > > > > > index 8f61e93c0c5b..0f516dde81da 100644 > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/arch/mips/loongson64/numa.c > > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/arch/mips/loongson64/numa.c > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -130,8 +130,6 @@ static void __init node_mem_init(unsigned int node) > > > > > > > > > > > memblock_reserve((node_addrspace_offset | 0xfe000000), > > > > > > > > > > > 32 << 20); > > > > > > > > > > > - /* Reserve pfn range 0~node[0]->node_start_pfn */ > > > > > > > > > > > - memblock_reserve(0, PAGE_SIZE * start_pfn); > > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > Jiaxun Yang > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Sincerely yours, > > > > > > > > > Mike. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sincerely yours, > > > Mike. > > > > -- > Sincerely yours, > Mike.