Dongchun, On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 07:06:05PM +0800, Dongchun Zhu wrote: > Hi Sakari, > > Sorry I just sent email using outlook where default format is HTML, now > I use evolution, one Linux mail client that I used to send upstream > patch previously. > > On Thu, 2020-07-02 at 08:34 +0300, Sakari Ailus wrote: > > Dongchun, > > > > Please don't send HTML e-mail to Linux kernel related mailing lists. > > > > On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 03:48:56AM +0000, Dongchun Zhu (朱东春) wrote: > > > Hi Sakari, > > > > > > Sorry to bother you again, but I am so confused about the questions you raised. > > > I just synced mainline: 5.8-rc3 tarball from https://www.kernel.org/, on which I ran the git am <patch> command. > > > The patch-applying process shows no error. > > > -----------------8<------------------- > > > [mtk15013@mtkslt307 linux]$git apply --check media-i2c-Add-support-for-DW9768-VCM.patch > > > [mtk15013@mtkslt307 linux]$git am media-i2c-Add-support-for-DW9768-VCM.patch > > > Applying: media: dt-bindings: media: i2c: Document DW9768 bindings > > > Applying: media: i2c: dw9768: Add DW9768 VCM driver > > > -----------------8<------------------- > > > > > > On the other hand, I also compared dongwoon,dw9768.yaml file with other media device dt-bindings(like imx219.yaml and ov8856.yaml). > > > It seems there are no apparent differences between them. > > > Especially, the sentence '# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause)' shall be common. > > > I dunno why here dongwoon,dw9768.yaml reports trailing whitespace warnings while ov8856.yaml is silent. > > > > > > For the patch failed on MAINTAINERS, I am still curious what's wrong. > > > In fact, I locally have run parse-maintainers.pl script to check MAINTAINERS file before submitting patch. > > > The result also reports no errors. > > > -----------------8<------------------- > > > [mtk15013@mtkslt307 linux]$perl scripts/parse-maintainers.pl > > > [mtk15013@mtkslt307 linux]$ls > > > -----------------8<------------------- > > > > > > As to Base64 encoding, I checked each patch file again. They are all encoded in UTF-8. > > > As https://www.base64encode.org/ says, for an example, '77' in ASCII format would be changed to 'T' in Based64-encoded format. > > > This means there shall be messy code if we adpoting Based64-encoded format. > > > But I cannot see garbled messages in the current patches. > > > > > > The DW9768 serials-patch is attached. > > > @Tomasz @Andy @Rob could anyone help try to see whether the patch can be cherry-picked on Linux master branch or not? > > > Patchwork link: > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11633291/ > > > > Both of the patches appear to contain only ASCII characters. > > > > I did some research on this. It seems that the base64 encoded message body > > does have carriage returns, in both cases. Git am does not attempt to > > remove them in that case, but Patchwork does. Hence the files are fine if > > you download them from Patchwork --- where the mbox files have neither > > carriage returns nor base64 encoding. > > > > What does the file command say about the patch files produced by git > > format-patch? My guess is that something in between your local computer and > > LMML (and other mail servers) base64 encodes the message body. But where > > are the carriage returns added? Nevertheless they seem to be added before > > the base64 conversion. > > > > Hm... I used the file command to check the diff patch generated from git > format-patch and that downloaded from Patchwork, they are both ASCII > text. That's because Patchwork appears to be removing the carriage returns. git does not if the content is base64 encoded. Your e-mail setup simply appears to be broken. I'd suggest trying to send the patches encoded in base64 as a workaround. git send-email uses sendemail.transferEncoding configuration option for this. -- Sakari Ailus
