From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 234C9C77B7A for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2023 09:18:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239484AbjFGJSO (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jun 2023 05:18:14 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40706 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238542AbjFGJSG (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jun 2023 05:18:06 -0400 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:4433::2]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CED9383; Wed, 7 Jun 2023 02:18:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=/N4iQQzhKXwMLpsqAX/ldRXHvjdWxI/sMibJLHmuUyE=; t=1686129485; x=1687339085; b=tlLst//G60B0SndknUo2dNgUlP09MA53Vi92vpoCI+t2IgE aGN87YSPykv3sH7mOv0WHHpnRALVFit/DkxQsm54BnUHh/0Sn/ACv3uifCJOUOS+TgvvQcBaPmGAc RLH69C6n4cikB4Q78iLkzbUzd7aoE5cam6+7RJPAACYuuUTQj+x28ARU8DswpwWtccU479q5yFChW qiBbMJ1XveJXcD/+5QrFdX2elKEhHxi9iK7GzaGfS+w5i50Zsq7kiOjna0P80O53yNsEWajKt1PvB OPi5se5qgLzD5FzkyToGh5+19BPWCrGCNtMom8bvfxTnPGKJWrdlO77UjQtY+/5A==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1q6pIh-00GUej-1M; Wed, 07 Jun 2023 11:17:55 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Reported-by/Closes tag for uncommitted issues (was: Re: [PATCH v2] uml: Replace strlcpy with strscpy) From: Johannes Berg To: Philip Li , Richard Weinberger Cc: Eric Biggers , Azeem Shaikh , Maxim Krasnyansky , anton ivanov , linux-hardening , linux-kernel , linux-um , "Jason A. Donenfeld" , kernel test robot Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2023 11:17:54 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <20230606182410.3976487-1-azeemshaikh38@gmail.com> <1833651082.3690424.1686084717406.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at> <20230607042340.GA941@sol.localdomain> <57443d420183b7a0bcab8041c2dfe3ba44e054f4.camel@sipsolutions.net> <2092891129.3692555.1686126895090.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.48.2 (3.48.2-1.fc38) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2023-06-07 at 17:10 +0800, Philip Li wrote: > > > So it seems we should ask the robot maintainers to just stop suggesti= ng > > > those tags? > >=20 > > Agreed. >=20 > Thanks all for the feedback. We will carefully consider how to present th= e > suggestion clearly. >=20 > For now, because the bot covers both upstream and developer repos, there > can be various situations, such as the bug is found in upstream.=C2=A0 Ah yes, that was actually in my mind, but I forgot to write about it, sorry. I agree completely, in case that you find a bug in an already committed tree, and there will be a separate commit to fix it, it's completely reasonable and useful to have those tags. > So the bot > tries to let author decide how to apply the tags in appropriate way that > they feel comfortable. Right. It just seems that many authors aren't really all that familiar with the processes yet, and take the suggestion at face value. > In the report, we now uses phrases like below >=20 > If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag where applicable > | Reported-by: kernel test robot > | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202305311135.zGMT1gYR-lk= p@intel.com/ >=20 > But this may be not clear enough or not the best way to suggest. We will > consider whether we can detect some situations (like RFC patch) which is > no need for such tags to avoid confusion. >=20 Right. Maybe the only thing really needed would be to say something like "If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of the same patch/commit), kindly add ..." or even just "If you fix the issue in a separate commit, kindly add ..." so it's clear that if you're changing the commit, it's not really something that should be done? In which case probably even a Fixes tag should be there, but I wouldn't want to recommend adding that since the commits may still change etc. I don't know all the processes behind it, but I'm thinking that even if the bot picked up a patch from the list, it could get committed before and then fixed in a separate commit. johannes