Re: sashiko or lore confused?

[Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>]

On 10/12/26 13:48, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 6:58 AM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 10/12/26 02:00, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
>>> Some threads seem stuck somewhere in the ether for sometime now. I
>>> asking because i have a backlog and dont want to flood things..
>>>
>>> 1) Sashiko nipa review is missing on the act_api duplicate-index series
>>> ========================================================================
>>> The nipa sashiko never produced a review for this series: gemini
>>> sahiko reviewed it ("No issues found").
>>>
>>>     Original posting (v1, 2026-09-22):
>>>       https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/QDISC-K1TH.v1.20260922072206@mojatatu.com/
>>>         [PATCH net 1/2] net/sched: act_api: reject duplicate actions in a batch
>>
>> We had a few PW outages recently, and that impacts directly clashiko. Also the
>> threading (new version in reply to the old one) tends to confuse PW.
>>
>>> 2) What is still left on these two?
>>> ===================================
>>> (a) act_api_delete_duplicate_index_refcount_uaf (links above). After the
>>>       2/2 delivery glitch and the two reposts, is anything still
>>>       outstanding from the maintainer side, or is this only waiting on the
>>>       missing nipa review?
>>
>> PW still did not handle the repost correctly. I think you need to send again the
>> patches, and please send them in a new thread!
>>
>>> (b) teql_xmit_path_pre_existing_bugs -- series [PATCH net 0/2] QDISC-6HS9,
>>>       sent 2026-09-29. Both Sashiko providers reviewed it: gemini "No
>>>       issues found"; nipa one Medium (commit-message doc wording) plus a
>>>       pre-existing, out-of-scope item (the consumed-skb UAF, tracked
>>>       separately). We do not plan a respin for the doc wording. Is
>>>       anything else outstanding before merge?
>>>
>>>       cover:  https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/QDISC-6HS9.v1.20260928064754@mojatatu.com/
>>>       1/2:    https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/QDISC-6HS9.v1.20260928064754@mojatatu.com.1/
>>>       2/2:    https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/QDISC-6HS9.v1.20260928064754@mojatatu.com.2/
>>>
>> I'm unsure who set the above to changes requested. Your reply looks legit.
>> I reset the series to 'new' status, but we have a long backlog, I'm unsure
>> I'll be able to process the above before PW will archive the post. In such
>> a case a repost would be needed :(
>>
> 
> Thanks for looking Paolo.
> 
> I can resend all 3. I probably screwed up the message ids and it ended
> being threaded to the old posting.
> How do i force it to "new"? Should i send the subject line? I already
> added "repost3" on net/sched: act_api: reject duplicate actions in a
> batch thread but it was still not reviewed.

emails are threaded by lore according to the `Message-id` identifier and
the `In-Reply-To` field.

AFAICS there is something unusual on you setup, as i.e.  the `repost` message
contains:

Message-ID: <QDISC-K1TH.v1.20260922072206@mojatatu.com>
Message-ID: <20261003095453.4jiXbPK5mkXck0VOLiLu3sM9l-NGfDiZ4G96YKNDV-0@z>

where the first message-id refers to the original posting and should not be
there.

Please check the output of `git format-patch`

/P

p.s. I don't see a `report3` revision yet? also feel free to move this off-list.