From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f42.google.com (mail-wm1-f42.google.com [209.85.128.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC4503D7A19 for ; Thu, 14 May 2026 07:21:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.42 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778743265; cv=none; b=SLHOxzaP4KKfrrLtsjBPHbMLi4B1mExXVmaIGWnNshZR/GOY2MAfWYicN4WeU0yPxTGIM2dWqMSbHCPpz5CapTxVtLdhieSElrNQYEKo6nKsDwKAoYfXh4So+8VXgNMLD8Smp3HgxfA2iN79SutLeU+erUNRg/vF7qZZpwhUWkM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778743265; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nXlC69mjeia8IpbITBoM6hWK0c+I1rwCL7gHRpi0eNI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=i2Rg7eo+REqlkJJnETb6Ck+uuzIMT0dB57+ADVdtjoNSVVdF9GP1FKLdHaoIQ53UkTXolvIQk9NNaBkMDuUpXMcRHK7X+wvdRig3q3z0ffRJq68LDUtOgbNgN/AjGbzDMVhm5gVH6lNra69nzf88+ggPN/1IXWEsCQbjh7YdluU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b=K9XVPXyr; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.42 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="K9XVPXyr" Received: by mail-wm1-f42.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-488ad135063so61606575e9.0 for ; Thu, 14 May 2026 00:21:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=google; t=1778743262; x=1779348062; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=GLDl5+jeWVEPVUIjYt/gD1wOZBUbuKJWiTwRWkSgoOQ=; b=K9XVPXyrTxQBuVx3yewDWtaAMPw1g+FDDo+UxEQ78+ME1B8CPK6DtqsDtdX/g3w9CW ueKW44ZMA3vH7FAcjfD/1VhJ1irJ5qf9Po2cmcdiq1y2Ap4v89qKIHqMZ52hBVZo4x8w L2zvFvoVi2lQrceeFhDWMhkRmFbXKuQetRcmPLtx1gYiaGF0a4e38CpJ+8VNtQghWOJN GoJRhGYliJOuOKSddvj+4P4jdybxTGxqIch6Lqx6Segn/d2JT1KvdMKMPx4jMWBU1MgK Iapqq5V3un8tYHU5n6ZR5R/wJio1Y3rDgjiPfWpPdSJc0FNW4KFs8mdAuZjjAKSTNidJ YPZg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1778743262; x=1779348062; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=GLDl5+jeWVEPVUIjYt/gD1wOZBUbuKJWiTwRWkSgoOQ=; b=MCQwKlaFnvCp1rwtE0tMqmvyfuIvIRR14VStvKUknf3wbWeFFa8KAMkqZMbwH0DvF9 UWp7loTOYe738riuFimxS6q6XMr9PUNpBtCPKhU+mQrRB4BtslYEyJ4I725245+OYpoL vODaW9E1ERTXT5PAb+4w0xMRBnMKPwVVlomTZp1zI/Hd+VEiTd8iIYyfYDHRmLLeSo7j KC/qSBohPpCoPrvftVrdLsniIqtCKDRhh8J35qBL02wOd2IAN1eNTwhxSPNA6ABo12GS gDyCA2LYDYdhO0I2Y8xfQ4TMFXf9vx5AC+53A5ECSJp1l49HFGg8owIWEDN0lHnVY4dF x07Q== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AFNElJ+8jJ8jC3G47xTb729uI+4HMMTw9ygeTok6R0LOchXimPIUKHkVYZjQg8+ZVxNElCxrlN4cnpLmaUJ9fxZb@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzaimyVpiCMLEASAvn63wl4bU1VdAl7622rdfpySfRxt5I6EByG 2PDtpTnHAOZUhSCtjUIaYhucLF70V6QPKJmRgIanZ8dKnv6k7X2yEu8MYbHRsgRhSGs= X-Gm-Gg: Acq92OGHqw8VQNSCDKwrrZ1a0mKMb7bziVA/xjWi8TdWHIMySH+9uEkf5YhmBye9rDI keydrf55Cua3TU9w3n3RHAtU2226qBmlty2fiLnswEhX8H3mZBmLheddJKJ9XfEvUSf6adiwvqB 8cLXYVYAdcb9hLS+XiEFoll/R3TV6SnshTdVmzuF1irhh0i94XSxD007oP5J9EUhxFkmJmsaT2U yVmvBun2uhAsvlzgmdlceKXDpyaCiumyLdN1MxdLxSbmQt9DWd3BjUicDI4tPk9hOOCpRXIACqZ vHhk907jP7HkySV3Pc4b+GS7CFmeioRD8et4KQKLyt6XH0MwKeWoD2re+u/G64CIqMHGVlVktSD TSQMQNUVgK6z/xBVfe89RZBAiLzFJNrjw7/GBqNv4EPB+Uqo+K6EFtVtCH08HUexeUj8ZIIm4ep wTHsiWSHY2+yQjCHa4X+mmiTHgRI2xkjX0k94e X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:c84:b0:48a:65ad:1881 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-48fce9eac86mr94051245e9.13.1778743262248; Thu, 14 May 2026 00:21:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pathway.suse.cz ([176.114.240.130]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-45d9ec39806sm4430372f8f.9.2026.05.14.00.21.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 14 May 2026 00:21:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 May 2026 09:21:00 +0200 From: Petr Mladek To: Josh Poimboeuf Cc: Song Liu , Joe Lawrence , live-patching@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Kosina , Miroslav Benes Subject: Re: Sashiko patch review for live-patching? Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: live-patching@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Wed 2026-05-13 12:47:13, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 10:17:51AM -0700, Song Liu wrote: > > Hi Joe, > > > > On Wed, May 13, 2026 at 9:13 AM Joe Lawrence wrote: > > > > > > Hello live-patching maintainers, > > > > > > I've noticed several references to the Sashiko (https://sashiko.dev/) > > > kernel review bot on this list and was wondering if there is interest in > > > adding live-patching to the mailing lists Sashiko tracks. > > > > I think it is a great idea. AFAICT, these bots add a lot of values in the > > code reviews. > > +1 > > > > Integration appears straightforward: we can submit an MR to add our > > > entry to sashiko-k8s.yaml and customize the bot's email behavior in > > > email_policy.toml. > > > > > > Full Sashiko Maintainer documentation is available here: > > > https://github.com/sashiko-dev/sashiko/blob/main/MAINTAINERS_GUIDE.md > > > > > > Personally, I would vote to set reply_to_author. I don't have a strong > > > opinion on the other custom options, provided that the CC list is opt-in > > > rather than simply mirrored from the MAINTAINERS::LIVE PATCHING file. > > > Either way, I've found the Sashiko web interface very helpful in patch > > > review. > > > > Given the relatively low volume of patches to the livepatch mail list, I > > think we can use reply_all. But if folks prefer reply_to_author instead, > > we sure can use the cc list. > > I would vote reply_all. The signal/noise ratio isn't perfect, but it's > high enough to be useful in many cases. That way the > maintainers/reviewers are aware of any potential issues, and it avoids > duplicating review work and fragmenting conversations. I agree. And it might even motivate us to update the subsystem specific review prompts so that the review gets improved over time. Best Regards, Petr