Re: [PATCHv3 0/4] generic: Add some tests around journal replay/recoveryloop

Zorro Lang
2022-04-02T03:40:56Z

On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 10:04:51AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 01:30:47PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 10:23:35PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> > > On 22/03/31 09:49PM, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> > > > On 22/03/31 10:59PM, Zorro Lang wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 06:24:19PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Your below patches looks like not pure text format, they might contain
> > > > > binary character or some special characers, looks like the "^M" [1].
> > >
> > > Sorry to bother you. But here is what I tried.
> > > 1. Download the mbx file using b4 am. I didn't see any such character ("^M") in
> > > the patches.
> > > 2. Saved the patch using mutt. Again didn't see such character while doing
> > > cat -A /patch/to/patch
> > > 3. Downloaded the mail using eml format from webmail. Here I do see this
> > > character appended. But that happens not just for my patch, but for all
> > > other patches too.
> > >
> > > So could this be related to the way you are downloading these patches.
> > > Please let me know, if I need to resend these patches again? Because, I don't
> > > see this behavior at my end. But I would happy to correct it, if that's not the
> > > case.
> >
> > Hmm... weird, When I tried to open your patch emails, my mutt show me:
> >
> > [-- application/octet-stream is unsupported (use 'v' to view this part) --]
> >
> > Then I have to input 'v' to see the patch content. I'm not sure what's wrong,
> > this's the 2nd time I hit this "octet-stream is unsupported" issue yesterday.
> >
> > Hi Darrick, or any other forks, can you open above 4 patches normally? If that's
> > only my personal issue, I'll check my side.
>
> There's no application/octet anywhere in the email that I received.
> Has your IT department gone rogue^W^Wincreased value-add again?

Thanks Darrick and Ojaswin! I'll check with our IT department. But it's weird, only
this patchset and 2 of another patch[1](it's sent 3 times) has this problem, I see
all other patches normally. And Ritesh, sorry for taking your time to check it :-D

Thanks,
Zorro

[1]
[PATCH v2] generic/674: replace _require_scratch_reflink with _require_scratch_dedupe

>
> --D
>
> > Thanks,
> > Zorro
> >
> > >
> > > -ritesh
> > >
> >
>