* Re: Linking Patchwork with Sashiko?
2026-07-20 13:36 ` Linking Patchwork with Sashiko? Steven Rostedt
@ 2026-07-21 0:34 ` Masami Hiramatsu
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Masami Hiramatsu @ 2026-07-21 0:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steven Rostedt; +Cc: Roman Gushchin, Masami Hiramatsu, Linux trace kernel
On Mon, 20 Jul 2026 09:36:55 -0400
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> [ Removed all Cc's. Added Masami and linux-trace-kernel mailing list ]
>
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2026 00:09:39 +0000
> Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> > Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> writes:
> >
> > > On Wed, 15 Jul 2026 21:08:47 +0000
> > > Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev> wrote:
> > >
> > >> At this moment there are 36 mailing lists who opted in for delivering email
> > >> reviews over email (without counting linux-media@). In every single case
> > >> it was based on maintainers requests in all cases of a disagreement
> > >> between maintainers I took the conservative side.
> > >
> > > Oh, I think I missed this opt-in. Can you add replies to patches sent
> > > to linux-trace-kernel. Currently, I've been manually looking to see if
> > > a patch had a Sashiko review and sending the author a link to the
> > > review and told them to please reply to the comments.
> > >
> > > Note, I have not had anyone tell me the are against doing so.
> >
> > May I ask you to raise this question with other linux-trace-kernel
> > maintainers and cc me on the thread? Just to make sure everyone is
> > onboard.
>
> Masami,
>
> Are you OK with having Sashiko send an email on what it finds to the
> author and the mailing list?
Yeah, I hope that is good to make a discussion on ML about reviewed
result.
Mostly those are reasonable now, so maybe we need to decide a standard
format for "all-Ack".
Current problem is that the Sashiko does not look back the previous
discussion, so the commit or code comment should clearly state
"this code is intensionally do something."
A current issue is that, since Sashiko does not reflect the content
of past discussions, we must explicitly state within commits or code
comments, (where you have determined that a past review comment was
incorrect) that the code is intentionally doing this operation and why.
> >
> > Also, please, let me know if sashiko should reply to the author and
> > also if it should send an email if there are no issues found.
>
> I think if it finds no issues it should still send the email, as it
> adds to the confidence of the patch. It also lets us know that the
> email wasn't just dropped.
>
> Oh, I would think that "Failed to apply" results should *not* be sent.
Yes, the fact that there is no response from Sashiko implies that
the application failed.
Thank you,
--
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread