linux-kernel - Re: Git pull ack emails..

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87efbwqw5s.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
Date:   Thu, 08 Nov 2018 10:56:31 +1100
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:     Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <rob.herring@...aro.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        kirill@...temov.name, "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, jacek.anaszewski@...il.com,
        axboe@...nel.dk, "Ulf Hansson" <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Git pull ack emails..

Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com> writes:
> Hello Michael,
>
> On Thu, 01 Nov 2018 21:18:28 +1100
> Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au> wrote:
>
>> Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> writes:
>> 
>> > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 12:36:14PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:  
>> >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 9:14 AM Linus Torvalds
>> >> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:  
>> >  
>> >> > Are there other situations where you might want to track something
>> >> > _outside_ of a pull request? Maybe. I can't really think of a lot of
>> >> > them, though. Patches etc don't have commit ID's to track, but it  
>> >
>> > patchwork gives them IDs and lets you do lookups using them, that's what
>> > I'm doing.  You can get the ID from a git commit by piping the output of
>> > git show into parser.py from the patchwork source, it works a lot of the
>> > time but things like editing the commit message will break it (this is a
>> > theme with my scripting around the mail stuff...).
>> >  
>> >> submissions. For example, with Greg and Mark B you can expect an
>> >> automated replies. Mark's reply gets threaded with the original, but
>> >> Greg's do not. For networking, you may or may not get a manual reply,  
>> >
>> > Mine *mostly* gets threaded, it's relying on being able to talk to
>> > patchwork to figure out the message ID at the minute so if the patchwork
>> > lookup fails for whatever reason it'll just use on what's in the commit
>> > for the CC list and not thread.  That isn't ideal, especially when I'm
>> > travelling and my network connection isn't the best, I keep meaning to
>> > try to figure out a better way which would probably be based on git
>> > notes as discussed earlier.  
>> 
>> Yeah I use git notes for this.
>> 
>> When I apply a patch I record the patchwork id in a git note, I have a
>> custom hacked pwclient that does it automatically. I also download the
>> full mbox from patchwork and stash it in .git/patchwork/<patch id>.
>> 
>> Then I have everything I need to generate a properly threaded reply to
>> the original mail.
>> 
>> The git notes work well, if you add the following to your .git/config:
>> 
>> [notes]
>> 	rewriteRef = refs/notes/*
>> 	displayRef = refs/notes/*
>> 
>> Then all notes are copied when you rewrite a commit (rebase), and also
>> displayed by eg. git show.
>> 
>> Every now and then if you do extensive rebasing/splitting you get
>> commits with the wrong or no patchwork ids. But that's pretty rare and
>> not that hard to fixup when it happens.
>> 
>> There's a slightly sanitised version of some of my scripts here:
>>   https://github.com/mpe/patchwork-scripts
>
> I had pretty much the same workflow to automatically update the patch
> status in patchwork when I push things to the MTD tree, but I was
> lacking the part sending notifications (this was done manually).
>
> With your scripts this is now addressed, thanks a lot for sharing
> them!

Awesome, glad they helped!

I have some modifications locally to detect when I've merged an entire
series and only reply to the first patch. At the moment that's all a bit
too hacky for public viewing, but I'll try and clean it up at some point
and push it out :)

cheers