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 0689B2641FC for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 06:39:04 +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=1783665546; cv=none; b=HGQEMj4tD4XUfSuubeqHlIRYEVWKBRTZPS9n9BMFpF3pMObWXFa5Jn3oD2YA4TXp3HkRYZgszn5oia99fQb3kSKlF1DYOpCqobPmM5kkvOpMNYWt563GaI3kzqOo3SDC29bawity8lRLTS9GfMRcjexaM9nNpc41KxnUGOlD/xQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783665546; c=relaxed/simple; bh=e8SDB/Bo194r4JCaA3OLOqJ5XndsslpWaSVIn1NjmXI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Oiw7eI4EGq2eKHXSlvzc9OPq31yggkx20vZuyMRzIJRYZH8tZNMbNU/o8HkfQ2hb56/ZNXgjWYgF4RbhdYHJK0X4ZUvBxbyeYsWmYLBqKyK4zat9kFZYLGI35MXsUIZDPMTixYkBNYa5ihqDNe4t1Ns8aEWVAcAKoV4WMaays4I= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=DIljIyQQ; 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="DIljIyQQ" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B09A11F000E9; Fri, 10 Jul 2026 06:39:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1783665544; bh=1n2nq7IYE3jZVByFqRTbu6zMGUNPhgx47iDdiYvA1No=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=DIljIyQQ3WgDEgMeGolZyleIqNopWUN7GaAiFfZX9leBn7ILKKBj9Fijr/AATf9ko 5Se77GKAFjUMgZh5w4TtzOH/SAMQRBnRMCMvIgMdMKtzUlrP5F1yW68YG07vS3y9Rs G8n+lpifTA3Tyeg6REZwi0S4r+84rRjdEE1nBQtHjqcc7wcfqcECGPuNEy7JeoYzMn uXRCCKE7iV+TsgHaR7BMZLszr56fj0SntE3pWcs1pXi03RYyopzMQZsYvTvO1bDaCF 9aW6xErmr6BJZVL6G6KKJCMQbX+Nhw/39jUlm+3bRN4YhcEeOU6/jwpxe1AEs2VJtp H0XLPjkQJmQWA== Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2026 08:39:00 +0200 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: Derek Barbosa , Roman Gushchin Cc: Matthieu Baerts , Konstantin Ryabitsev , Jason Gunthorpe , Steven Rostedt , users@kernel.org, Linux Media Mailing List , Stephen Finucane Subject: Re: Linking Patchwork with Sashiko? Message-ID: <20260710083845.23c753ca@foz.lan> In-Reply-To: <20260710074528.5a6e4457@foz.lan> References: <7E971C76-0568-43EF-9EE7-C8DB78C45CA1@linux.dev> <20260530200017.0fe7f685@foz.lan> <20260530204945.22ac92c6@foz.lan> <20260530205351.19847fc8@foz.lan> <7ia4tsrkn1k4.fsf@castle.c.googlers.com> <20260602223936.27def657@foz.lan> <20260604085201.177ad537@foz.lan> <20260607195656.02788791@foz.lan> <20260710074528.5a6e4457@foz.lan> 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 Hi Derek/Roman, On Fri, 10 Jul 2026 07:45:28 +0200 Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Hi Derek, >=20 > On Tue, 30 Jun 2026 16:32:30 -0400 > Derek Barbosa wrote: >=20 > > On Sun, Jun 07, 2026 at 07:56:56PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: = =20 > > > Added both global and per-project permissions to add CI checks: > > >=20 > > > https://github.com/getpatchwork/patchwork/pull/653 > > >=20 > > > Tested on a docker container created on the top of current > > > upstream, with the database imported from linuxtv.org and > > > migrated to the new permissions model. =20 > >=20 > > Hi Mauro, > >=20 > > Patchwork integration has been cleaned up and the original issues filed= against > > the Sashiko project have been resolved. > >=20 > > Any progress on your work for the permissions modifications (or enablin= g it for > > media)? =20 >=20 > I'd like to have the permission modification changes applied at > Patchwork upstream before applying it to linux-media instance, as > this will require a DB change, which can make it harder in the future > to update linux-media patchwork instance, especially if upstream ends > with some changes over my proposed patch. >=20 > So, while patchwork doesn't have a separated permission for checks > addition, we'll keep using my tool to update bots feedback from > e-mails. To prevent too much noise at linux-media, we have now a >=20 > media-ci@linuxtv.org >=20 > mailing list that is meant to receive all bots feedback. The > e-mail parser is listening to it as well. Btw, we did an inquire among the participants of the latest media summit, where we discussed Sashiko. There is a consensus of receiving Sashiko feedback at=20 media-ci@linuxtv.org, where people can opt-in/opt-out. With regards to c/c authors, there was a proposal to add a custom=20 disclaimer's notice on each patch. Also, several people manifested that it should be possible for authors to opt-out receiving Sashiko's e-mails. So, at least with the current way, we were unable to reach a consensus (or a large majority) about c/c the author. So, what it is a consensus is to receive Sashiko's email via media-ci@linuxtv.org, evaluating its feedback results for a couple=20 of kernel releases. IMO, it is better to receive there also e-mails if Sashiko didn't find any issue. One interesting feedback was related to a review from i.MX DTS and DMAEngin= e=20 I3C patch series. I guess it could be the start of a custom linux-media prompt. The original suggestion is: "I suggested add some actionable advice. The below action when I handle i.MX DTS and DMAEngine\I3C sashakio review feedback. =20 - "Pre existing issue" \ "not introduce by this patch", can omit this feed= back, But encourage fix at following patch - "UAF" or lock issue, most like is true issue, strongly suggest fix it. = Maintainer Most likely double check this type issue. - Small issue like "typo" or "indention", please fix before maintainer in= volve Review.=20 - other identify severity is HIGH issue, suggest reply sashiko email and p= rovide Your judgement when close to land." There was also a discussion about a magic number inside a loop: for (unsigned int i =3D 0; i < 56; i++) { (on such loop, "i" was used to access an array) Sashiko didn't pick this one on one of his reviews. I guess we can start with a custom RAC prompt to make Sashiko classify its output according with a criteria similar to the above. E.g. maybe linux-media may start with a custom prompt similar to this (as part of a more complete RAC): ### Classification categories and actions 1. **Pre=E2=80=91existing issues** - a bug or flaw that already exists in = the current code and is *not introduced by this patch*. =20 - **Action**: Place at the end, under "Further suggestions". Note that = the issue could be addressed on a separate patch =20 - Mark as: `classification: PRE_EXISTING`, `action: DEFER_FOLLOWUP`. 2. **UAF / Lock issues** - use=E2=80=91after=E2=80=91free, race condition,= missing lock, double unlock, deadlock, incorrect refcounting, etc. =20 - **Action**: This is almost certainly a true bug. Encourage the author= to check or consult an expert if in doubt. - Mark as: `classification: CRITICAL_LOCKING_UAF`, `action: MUST_FIX`. 3. **Small issues** - typo, indentation, coding=E2=80=91style, whitespace,= missing blank line, comment grammar, overly long line, etc. =20 - **Action**: These should be corrected before the maintainer becomes i= nvolved in the review. =20 - Mark as: `classification: STYLE_TYPO`, `action: FIX_BEFORE_MAINTAINER= `. 4. **Magic numbers** - when a numeric literal (like `56`, `128`) is used w= ithout a defined constant or obvious connection to an array size.=20 - **Action**: These should be corrected before the maintainer becomes i= nvolved in the review. =20 - Mark as: `classification: MAGIC_NUMBER`, `action: FIX_BEFORE_MAINTAIN= ER`. 5. **Other HIGH severity issues** =E2=80=93 any problem that is clearly a = functional bug (logic error, NULL deref, buffer overflow, API misuse, incor= rect error handling, memory leak, etc.) that does not fall into category 2.= =20 - **Action**: the authors should provide their own judgment on the issu= e (e.g., explain why it is a false positive, or confirm the fix). =20 - Mark as: `classification: HIGH_OTHER`, `action: REPLY_WITH_JUDGMENT_N= EAR_LANDING`. 6. **Low severity / Informational** =E2=80=93 anything that does not fit t= he above (e.g., suggestion, minor question, potential improvement that is n= ot a bug). =20 - **Action**: Optional; can be addressed at author=E2=80=99s discretion= . =20 - Mark as: `classification: LOW_INFO`, `action: OPTIONAL`. Please notice that we're not a prompt experts - nor, afaikt, any media developer tested running Sashiko locally themselves - so you probably can come up with a better custom prompt than us. Thanks, Mauro