From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757226AbcBXHHe (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Feb 2016 02:07:34 -0500 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:25165 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750931AbcBXHHc (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Feb 2016 02:07:32 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,493,1449561600"; d="scan'208";a="658355940" Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 15:07:27 +0800 From: Fengguang Wu To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Dan Carpenter , Xiaolong Ye , git@vger.kernel.org, ying.huang@intel.com, philip.li@intel.com, julie.du@intel.com, Linus Torvalds , "Eric W. Biederman" , Christoph Hellwig , "H. Peter Anvin" , LKML Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 1/1] format-patch: add an option to record base tree info Message-ID: <20160224070727.GA23808@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> References: <1456109938-8568-2-git-send-email-xiaolong.ye@intel.com> <20160223014741.GA21025@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> <20160223091740.GA3830@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> <20160223103253.GE5273@mwanda> <20160223120015.GA10488@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> <20160223133135.GF5273@mwanda> <20160224025519.GB16562@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 10:30:04PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Fengguang Wu writes: > > > The necessary lines for the robot are > > > > base commit: > > base patch-id: > > or > > base tree-id: > > base patch-id: > > I will not repeat why a commit object name would be more appropriate > than a tree object name here (please see my response to HPA). Yes I see that reasoning in your other email. > > The "base tree-id" will be useful if the submitted patchset is based > > on a public (maintainer) commit. > > > > The "base patch-id" will be useful if the submitted patchset is based > > on another patchset someone (likely the developer himself) posted to > > the mailing list. > > Is there a database of in-flight patches indexed by their patch-ids > with a large enough coverage (hopefully those who maintain such a Yes, the 0day robot internally maintains such a patch-id => commit-id (of the below git tree) database for in-flight patches. We exported a git tree which holds all in-flight patches, where each patchset maps to a new branch: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/branches We monitor dozens of linux kernel mailing lists, the coverage is pretty good for the linux kernel project. > database are using the --stable version of the patch-id for indexing > the patches)? Right, we do use the --stable option. > I am wondering how well this scales, especially if a > well-known commit named by "base commit" needs to be checked out and > then many in-flight patches identified by "base patch-id"s need to > be applied on top of it, to prepare the tree-ish the patch being > evaluated can be applied to. The database is effectively a key-value store, in the scale of 1000 new mappings per day. If we only keep 100 days data, there will be 100k mappings, which could be hold in 10MB memory. > This starts to sound more like something you would want to write in > the cover letter, or the trailer block next to Signed-off-by: at the > end of the first patch in the series. Yes, that's roughly what the current patch does, except in the latter case we add new info after diffstat. > Or even after the mail > signature at the very end of the message (incidentally that would > probably minimize the damage to the Git codebase needed for this > addition--you should be able to do this without touching anything > other than builtin/log.c). That's an interesting place. It looks worth trying. Thanks, Fengguang