From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53463342CB3 for ; Sat, 30 May 2026 18:00:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780164024; cv=none; b=rj/3Y1UPuVQqjyU3uOg14JXWgCpG3Dgybp1al0GzgWCbHr+LpokdM0KnkbZqKKTnLLVSsqDNC6APqrcyQ8cRaIxJM02VRTs+uRgYNuVk15S8I278KExSoGE7G3Awufn2iWl1bLHicXIBcnjRQQP+I383cJGIHVrLMbO6WjLDHhg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780164024; c=relaxed/simple; bh=7/XvxLcrEU9e7itf83nGhqk8SdGNlxP/QiO3sQXiVzU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=iJ2toxEGvrQz04TtDccZW/+1szs7mP8VkSfU/U9FqTbKtrZY5Rw67Lq88TZHBNpjL9E3+GSQMuVysBz1mHI25HlL/N0ZWy/oE+tddhdDx5wZDly/92RNcvEsA6F1Y6Cs1BYnvcNKGPODeEl6Yb5CVCpBZKB4FhVbuHsWjYvZJ1s= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=nWs7QtZd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="nWs7QtZd" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7E9EE1F00898; Sat, 30 May 2026 18:00:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1780164022; bh=sB95AeAQB4DcmqKWYki8m9Y3cn29Y+9hpfDFO5Sf8B4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=nWs7QtZdOJPt8soEo7iqhk+RNF6mU7T5jCimnfxKUOrYDvR2bf48LupS8VL6lcWuw 8JsSCayMXd7A8w0zAhX3FgUAB3uIWPnZyrS3l2kwJr+yRAOX4A6giLV6IP+o93q3oE 4BM8QjNn4zboJX3fKR31AteHrmas/sgvjvA6IUIKuBikT3323CZ/rzjW0K2k9OtqFo aPXlCa1p3LU1geHfAh0rsND4nujmeVoMbuWpjDpG/SMQR8nleTyTcW01ouuS1bexKM e219cJQbaPOaKDRueKIl6DmdNg2pI24B7/qroi8AXHRGW39+r52q86GOCmdPrrULAs YvoHPt+owEC8w== Date: Sat, 30 May 2026 20:00:17 +0200 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: Roman Gushchin Cc: Derek Barbosa , Konstantin Ryabitsev , Jason Gunthorpe , Steven Rostedt , users@kernel.org, Linux Media Mailing List Subject: Re: Linking Patchwork with Sashiko? Message-ID: <20260530200017.0fe7f685@foz.lan> In-Reply-To: <7E971C76-0568-43EF-9EE7-C8DB78C45CA1@linux.dev> References: <20260530103004.6fe2ffa7@foz.lan> <7E971C76-0568-43EF-9EE7-C8DB78C45CA1@linux.dev> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.4.0 (GTK 3.24.52; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-media@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 30 May 2026 08:57:13 -0700 Roman Gushchin wrote: > Hi Mauro! >=20 > My understanding is that some subsystems might be interested in having pa= tchwork integration=20 > without Sashiko sending reviews over the email. Most notable, net. Also m= ptcp. Well, you can use my scripts to do such integration (https://github.com/mchehab/pw_tools). Yet, you'll need a patchwork token with full project permission to add a new check - e.g. it would allow Sachiko to not only change checks.=20 Such token will have all project grants including status and delegation changes. Anyway, for subsystems that prefer a direct integration and provide you a write token, you can let sashiko to run my script - or call directly the Python class on it - letting it update status directly. You'll probably need to implement a queue to do retries, in case patchwork server has issues by the time it tries to update. For media, I prefer a single e-mail, sent to a separate e-mail, to reduce e-mail traffic at the main ML. This way, we can let such script do just check changes - and use the same process to also handle other bots like sysbot and LKP. Also, emails are asynchronous, and, in case of problems, one can repeat the operation later using a ML archive to re-run the email queue.=20 >=20 > Thanks! >=20 > > On May 30, 2026, at 1:30=E2=80=AFAM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > >=20 > > =EF=BB=BFHi Derek/Konstantin/Roman, > > =20 > >> On Fri, 29 May 2026 11:28:29 -0400 > >> Derek Barbosa wrote: > >>=20 > >> Hi! > >> =20 > >>>=20 > >>> Forgot to mention, but at least on media patchwork, the best is for > >>> Sashiko to send an e-mail that would allow a local script to run it. > >>>=20 > >>> The rationale is that patchwork permissions aren't fine-grained: only > >>> an user with a project maintainer token can update checks. Granting > >>> such permission would allow other changes at the repository, like > >>> delegating a patch, archiving it or changing its status. > >>> =20 > >>=20 > >> Thanks for the note. It will take me a minute-or-two to get up to spee= d here. > >> I'll reach out for any clarifying questions if that's OK :^) =20 > >=20 > > I added a bot parsing tool at: > > https://github.com/mchehab/pw_tools > >=20 > > And ran it at the maildir with linux-media e-mails I have locally. > > It is currently set to parse e-mails from: > >=20 > > - LKP; > > - Sysbot; > > - Sashiko. > >=20 > > You can see the results at: > > https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/project/linux-media/list/ > >=20 > > (most of the warnings there are from my parser) > >=20 > > And this is how it looks when a patch with bot results is opened: > > https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/project/linux-media/patch/20260529-mil= os-iris-v2-2-7a763d7195ae@pm.me/ > >=20 > > I didn't set yet any daemon to keep this updated. As I used my own > > token, all contexts were marked with my own ID. > >=20 > > There is one issue with the current process: if there aren't any > > warnings on a patch, like on this example: > >=20 > > https://patchwork.linuxtv.org/project/linux-media/patch/202605291543= 57.18066-1-mohan86108@gmail.com/ > >=20 > > There's no way to tell if Sashiko tested such patch or not. As I > > commented with Roman in a private discussion, ideally the best > > would be if Sashiko could produce a single per-patch-series email > > that would have something similar to this: > >=20 > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/13] Improve process/maintainers output > > Reply-to: > >=20 > > Hi, > >=20 > > Sashiko robot found the following potencial issues: > >=20 > > Patch 1/13 ( > Patch 2/13 ( > Patch 3/13 ( > Patch 4/13 ( > Patch 5/13 ( >=20 > > Patch 6/13 ( > - [Low] The `self.field_prev` variable is assigned but never used > > ... > >=20 > > Patch 13/13: Success > >=20 > > Please check if those issues are pertinent. > >=20 > > Sashiko AI review > >=20 > > E.g. it would contain success and warning status for each message > > ID inside a patch series. This is also ideal for me as a maintainer, > > as I can clearly see the low/mid/high issues detected by sashiko > > on a single e-mail. > >=20 > > Thanks, > > Mauro =20 Thanks, Mauro