From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp2-g21.free.fr (smtp2-g21.free.fr [212.27.42.2]) (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 BC9024718D7; Mon, 12 Oct 2026 14:08:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=212.27.42.2 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791814140; cv=none; b=kCNE9Tqniubb6vTPxohzmzuKZ1jIuoc/fys5+dLW03JfpndP2YveYyqayXvjci3qJl8b+UNRNoxKTKft5vcT5Zj9iHtYaRsNa04pHHWcq461W7c7F0bhh+spvhxnAD4BGvohaUoxjoXFOl2DA9NteAcfwmmwgUsLx8o6kDMVe/U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791814140; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5NqQN3twOjvV7VGfTkFD+oEXAYL6fnAiqaDrnzcTQ3k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Subject:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=AmVgARNGrlmQDhrJj6oNqQcU+/3DPEen+sumVqnOsBKOFzdtOFGCRL+qGlVRGR0EHS3D3XF1+csornk8tzppaQImTkwQvPioCODZzRSTdf2V3nFjsHo9xlh1G8tsHWT15aq4yfVOyus31kp0APEc4nRcZEq1gU/JDmUfUtiQg2o= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=free.fr; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=free.fr; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=free.fr header.i=@free.fr header.b=jWeXkbli; arc=none smtp.client-ip=212.27.42.2 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=free.fr Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=free.fr Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=free.fr header.i=@free.fr header.b="jWeXkbli" Received: from zimbra65-e11.priv.proxad.net (unknown [172.20.243.215]) by smtp2-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BB0D2003E8; Mon, 12 Oct 2026 16:08:48 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=free.fr; s=smtp-20201208; t=1791814128; bh=5NqQN3twOjvV7VGfTkFD+oEXAYL6fnAiqaDrnzcTQ3k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Subject:From; b=jWeXkbliblbXZEB+GRsipSUFyc4I9qXVJwVH8Je4mZ6zLpidSryzVt0b7ZP/FwQ4K N/KljX8Vzw8L4lPgv85RHqM20u99S2kGLqO2qHJU3O0h7BLL+J+JhOK745NxzYsS46 FCGFa0QRGEZyqL/9LbjLvcPhqg3/mJdUdTXgmnIy7vKkcsJ1+mtjc2E1MaLmjzJ2QS 9eYCHpcpGFGN7XG36502pp3LTwC2Ko1J3IQ0OAWOhedyTBC3uBvwgwym5WIF7IORTf t3+RCjHmKhAGD++8D+8fRylhLlzS1zHamquDJpi1LX7vvKi8x3u4LibdI3EJGq2xnq GS/jP0z9R/Cfg== Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2026 16:08:47 +0200 (CEST) From: =?utf-8?Q?St=C3=A9phane?= Grosjean To: Marc Kleine-Budde Cc: mailhol@kernel.org, Oliver Hartkopp , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-can@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <1228378911.1051074990.1791814127665.JavaMail.root@zimbra65-e11.priv.proxad.net> In-Reply-To: <20261012-rare-pigeon-of-elegance-6014fe-mkl@pengutronix.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] can: peak_usb: validate channel numbers in PCAN-USB FD Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Zimbra 7.2.0-GA2598 (ZimbraWebClient - GC154 (Linux)/7.2.0-GA2598) X-Authenticated-User: stephane.grosjean@free.fr Thank you so much for your help, Marc. I really appreciate it. Best regards, -- St=C3=A9phane ----- Mail original ----- > On 12.10.2026 11:04:56, St=C3=A9phane Grosjean wrote: > > I need help (or training) to figure out how to deal with these AI > > bots: > > > > - How many of them are there before the changes are accepted? It > > seems > > that even if a patch has passed the Sashiko filter, we should > > still > > expect feedback from other bots... >=20 > There's https://sashiko.dev/ , which replies within minutes (as long > as > you don't include the netdev mailing list). >=20 > And there's https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/, which embargoes the > review for ~24h, but runs several LLMs with better models. >=20 > > - The fact that there are multiple levels of bots isn=E2=80=99t a probl= em > > in > > itself, and is understandable. That feedback arrives on v1 even > > though > > v2 has already been analysed is also something I=E2=80=99m just learn= ing: > > so > > when can we consider it safe to push a new version without fear > > of > > receiving comments on the previous one? >=20 > Maybe you can mark the v1 as obsolete yourself with replying "pw-bot: > cr". > On a new line, without quotation marks, see: >=20 > https://github.com/linux-netdev/nipa/blob/main/mailbot.rst > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html#updat= ing-patch-status > https://github.com/linux-netdev/nipa/blob/e03d912ce66fd5d427cb9cf900409e1= abc6eeba2/mailbot.py#L52-L81 >=20 > > - And finally, providing more explicit comments on our changes is > > also > > a good thing. But when those comments themselves become a source > > of > > problems and rejections=E2=80=94due to an overly nitpicky interpretat= ion > > by a > > bot=E2=80=94it becomes far too time-consuming: >=20 > yes known problem :/ >=20 > regards, > Marc >=20 > -- > Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde | > Embedded Linux | https://www.pengutronix.de | > Vertretung N=C3=BCrnberg | Phone: +49-5121-206917-129 | > Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-9 | >=20