sashiko or lore confused?

sashiko or lore confused?

[Jamal Hadi Salim]

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

  Reposts (same content, no version bump) after Jakub flagged that 2/2
did not land and Simon on that repost  it was probably the W=1 failure
that deterred sashiko from reviewing:

    https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20260925082237.xktTTrRQRmp_V8OKNBxFnnUlj6a452UO12AQPOXYlPc@z/
    https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20260925082238.ApYMOyeo4f2cyHtNpBH4bmakwqO17BYdV-HiDQLVM3s@z/
    https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20261003095453.4jiXbPK5mkXck0VOLiLu3sM9l-NGfDiZ4G96YKNDV-0@z/
    https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20261003095454.A4i__8DE05M3wQB_gihs9BDHXVQXu0XpMHEs0y-k3Ow@z/

  Thread traffic:
    https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20260924102910.09e9c601@kernel.org/
    https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20260924103222.239e3d45@kernel.org/
    https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20260924134244.1824ed80@kernel.org/

  Sashiko:
    gemini:
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/QDISC-K1TH.v1.20260922072206@mojatatu.com

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?

(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/

    Sashiko:
      gemini 1/2:
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/QDISC-6HS9.v1.20260928064754%40mojatatu.com.1
      nipa   1/2:
https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/sashiko/#/patchset/QDISC-6HS9.v1.20260928064754%40mojatatu.com.1
      gemini 2/2:
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/QDISC-6HS9.v1.20260928064754%40mojatatu.com.2
      nipa   2/2:
https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/sashiko/#/patchset/QDISC-6HS9.v1.20260928064754%40mojatatu.com.2

    nipa review replies on lore:
      https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/179077366943.434549.8458923511073715827@kernel.org/
 (1/2)
      https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/179077367081.434549.3367341827161501919@kernel.org/
 (2/2)

cheers,
jamal

Re: sashiko or lore confused?

[Paolo Abeni]

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 :(

/P

Re: sashiko or lore confused?

[Jamal Hadi Salim]

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.
If you are unsure - we can experiment: I will change both the message
id and add "repost4" on just that one it and see if it still good on
lore and sashiko can see it.

cheers,
jamal

Re: sashiko or lore confused?

[Paolo Abeni]

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.