lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20151007142133.GA18322@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 22:21:33 +0800 From: Fengguang Wu <lkp@...el.com> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, josh@...htriplett.org, fweisbec@...il.com, dvhart@...ux.intel.com, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>, oleg@...hat.com, rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, kbuild-all@...org, dipankar@...ibm.com, bobby prani <bobby.prani@...il.com>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> Subject: Re: [kbuild-all] [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/18] rcu: Move rcu_report_exp_rnp() to allow consolidation On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 03:55:29PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 09:44:32PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > > > > Wu, is there a tag one can include to ward off this patch sucking robot > > > prematurely? > > > > Yes. The best way may be to push the patches to a git tree known to > > 0day robot: > > > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/wfg/lkp-tests.git/tree/repo/linux > > > > So that it's tested first there. You'll then get private email reports > > if it's a private git branch. > > Right, but if I can't be bothered to compile test a patch, I also cannot > be bothered to stuff it into git :-) OK, that's understandable. > > We may also add a rule: only send private reports for patches with > > "RFC", "Not-yet-signed-off-by:", etc. > > How about not building when there's no "^Signed-off-by:" at all? That's a good idea: no need to test quick demo-of-idea patches. > Even private build fails for patches like this -- esp. 3+ -- gets > annoying real quick. > > Also note that this 'patch' has: $subject ~ /^Re:/, nor did it have > "^Subject:" like headers in the body. That's good clues, too. So how about make the rule Skip test if no "^Signed-off-by:" and Subject =~ /^Re:/ For a patch posted inside a discussion thread, as long as it have "^Signed-off-by:", I guess the author is serious and the patch could be tested seriously. Thanks, Fengguang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists