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 8DF4510F1 for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2026 00:34:53 +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=1784594094; cv=none; b=UcKhqD+IcdUnnYbF2xXORMAav3r5jyJMFRgtzQGcmftKGlqnD1vcWINHyQx35Tubfpkfn9JIvTBKz77uGlaspUKDCO9p7EMxhL8GcZ8hxG4ujCgAFDzxpM8YxCJEosIMIUR/QipZrCJu9cGKX+YNeJrbGrd0mhuTvJtQVL2WzlI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784594094; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xhqg1g5OBm/TnQtbW3vs2+u2oy2JMbyJhqjHe5lSmYM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=FdN9pvnLP1AUcCyVjPX1HADR1LA/58gYYQseN2kuEOXjmHF1llK9K2m94452B+Y9G7IQ2yWtvmqBMZz1bQkgOAptvq+dxUG1vI+zShXylctct9+1OrmST2ABfGra/0rkQUtlIpichVdbaOlVnGMGWbiNlnUYp+GIcQ2ogfNbdGw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=asagOxcO; 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="asagOxcO" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0A9C81F000E9; Tue, 21 Jul 2026 00:34:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1784594093; bh=pVwFeDICgQW8/HCnQHrqeF7MB10O8acebp2MSPE4hus=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=asagOxcO3JvUz3Y2IQnF1Ds+taFlOTGde/5HB26EaL0mxWDGmIZ7jZcesT1IUoeAm HKV1vOQ/K8GQPsf8zy5A0xFwSBRt8z9xNQGNCUgNcIJcIW0w4+BtoniR7/6YiGtPWq nCH7mMRUFoy3MXk/1ljZoNngxDrgewHIR7iewho39Na+R+hLsdchBuPtpKKe0OhCHP h61W5yzPnVK23i0fJELkohWeaFMVQAnidOvFW41wWDt0ugxCk+3BSmr3Y3nnrgsBNl Lbw0FWhKr8mZjt6zjNFJy+1ry4M2Bc8p7kzmCpKkuUzBG45/8Ss0SMHF8j3P+Sesgz zE6ynwN5TIaNQ== Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2026 09:34:49 +0900 From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Roman Gushchin , Masami Hiramatsu , Linux trace kernel Subject: Re: Linking Patchwork with Sashiko? Message-Id: <20260721093449.968265216a1201101383b443@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20260720093655.4da2224d@robin> References: <20260715005909.GF1656185@killaraus.ideasonboard.com> <4928C919-7999-4E76-ADCB-F8643FED105B@linux.dev> <20260715162816.GF1778116@killaraus.ideasonboard.com> <7ia47bmw0xls.fsf@castle.c.googlers.com> <20260715192042.4052411a@robin> <7ia4wluvvlq4.fsf@castle.c.googlers.com> <20260720093655.4da2224d@robin> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.8.0beta1 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 20 Jul 2026 09:36:55 -0400 Steven Rostedt wrote: > > [ Removed all Cc's. Added Masami and linux-trace-kernel mailing list ] > > On Thu, 16 Jul 2026 00:09:39 +0000 > Roman Gushchin wrote: > > > Steven Rostedt writes: > > > > > On Wed, 15 Jul 2026 21:08:47 +0000 > > > Roman Gushchin 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)