On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 2:51 PM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 01:30:14PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 1:56 AM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 08:42:30PM -0700, Brian Vazquez wrote: > > > > Thanks for reviewing the patches Andrii! > > > > > > > > Although Daniel fixed them and applied them correctly. > > > > > > After last kernel/maintainer summit at LPC, I reworked all my patchwork scripts [0] > > > which I use for bpf trees in order to further reduce manual work and add more sanity > > > checks at the same time. Therefore, the broken Fixes: tag was a good test-case. ;-) > > > > Do you scripts also capitalize first word after libbpf: prefix? Is > > that intentional? Is that a recommended subject casing: > > > > "libbpf: Do awesome stuff" vs "libbpf: do awesome stuff"? > > Right now we have a bit of a mix on that regard, and basically what the > pw-apply script from [0] is doing, is the following to provide some more > context: > > - Pulls the series mbox specified by series id from patchwork, dumps all > necessary information about the series, e.g. whether it's complete and > all patches are present, etc. > - Pushes the mbox through mb2q which is a script that x86 maintainers and > few others use for their patch management and spills out a new mbox. > This is effectively 'normalizing' the patches from the mbox to bring in > some more consistency, meaning it adds Link: tags to every patch based > on the message id and checks whether the necessary mailing list aka > bpf was in Cc, so we always have lore BPF archive links, sorts tags so > they all have a consistent order, it allows to propagate Acked-by, > Reviewed-by, Tested-by tags from cover letter into the individual > patches, it also capitalizes the first word after the subsystem prefix. > - It applies and merges the resulting mbox, and performs additional checks > for the newly added commit range, that is, it checks whether Fixes tags > are correctly formatted, whether the commit exists at all in the tree or > whether subject / sha is wrong, and throws warnings to me so I can fix > them up if needed or toss out the series again worst case, as well as > checks whether SOB from the patch authors is present and matches their > name. > - It allows to set the patches from the series into accepted state in > patchwork. > > So overall less manual work / checks than what used to be before while > improving / ensuring more consistency in the commits at the same time. > If you have further suggestions / improvements / patches to pw.git, > happy to hear. :) > "libbpf: Captilized subj" looks weird, but I can live with that. I'll post subsequent patches with that casing. I'm glad a lot of that stuff is semi-automated, it's terrible to have to always check all that manually :) > Thanks, > Daniel > > > > [0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dborkman/pw.git/ > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 8:20 PM Andrii Nakryiko > > > > <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 10:40 AM Brian Vazquez <brianvv@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think there is a need to add "test_progs:" to subject, " > > > > > test_sockopt_inherit" is specific enough ;) > > > > > > > > > > > server_fd needs to be close if pthread can't be created. > > > > > > > > > > typo: closed > > > > > > > > > > > Fixes: e3e02e1d9c24 ("selftests/bpf: test_progs: convert test_sockopt_inherit") > > > > > > Cc: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Brian Vazquez <brianvv@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@xxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockopt_inherit.c | 2 +- > > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
