Re: [PATCH] Documentation: riscv: fix insufficient list item indent

Conor Dooley
2023-02-09T19:23:50Z

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2284 bytes --]

On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 10:48:58AM -0800, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 19:05:53 PST (-0800), bagasdotme@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 11:57:01PM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> > >
> > > When adding the ISA string ordering rules, I didn't sufficiently indent
> > > one of the list items.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > > Fixes: f07b2b3f9d47 ("Documentation: riscv: add a section about ISA string ordering in /proc/cpuinfo")
> > > Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> >
> > Seems like you forget to add link to the report:
> >
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/202301300743.bp7Dpazv-lkp@intel.com/
>
> Is that the normal way to do it? I've only been adding the Reported-by like
> the bot suggests, but I guess it's kind of nice information to have the bug
> report as well. From looking at git history it's kind of a mix.

IMO it totally depends on whether there is something useful in the
thread on lore. I see no point adding the links if they're just a
regurgitation of something conveyed in a commit message.

But then again, I don't bother adding a lore link to patchsets I apply
either. I'm in the Torvald's camp of only using those tags to link to
things containing "actual new information". There was a discussion of
that a while back, see [1] & [2] if you care, although it was largely
born out of frustration at links added by maintainers to original
submissions, not subjectively redundant bot emails.

Following that logic, I didn't bother adding one here, just as I
wouldn't for a compilation error if I included it in the commit log.

We've probably spent more time typing emails about it than the issue
warrants, but that's par for the course I suppose!

1 - https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wj9zKJGA_6SJOMPiQEoYke6cKX-FV3X_5zNXOcFJX1kOQ@mail.gmail.com/
2 - https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHk-=wgzRUT1fBpuz3xcN+YdsX0SxqOzHWRtj0ReHpUBb5TKbA@mail.gmail.com/
> Maybe the bot should suggest this in the bug report, right next to the other
> tag?

Iff the bot knows its own message-id before sending, I think that could
be nice to have. Does Intel's mail system may support that?

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 161 bytes --]