On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 12:19 PM David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This patch seems to have another of these weird MIME crap in it. (my > other patches in -next seem to be fine) > > See > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20200228095819.10750-2-david@xxxxxxxxxx/raw That email actually looks fine. Yes, it has that fro= m pattern, but it also has Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable so the recipient should be doing the right thing with that pattern. The patch itself also has MIME encoding in it: - cur_nr_pages =3D min(end_pfn - pfn, -(pfn | PAGE_SECTION_MASK)); + cur_nr_pages =3D min(end_pfn - pfn, so the patch wouldn't even apply unless the recipient did the proper MIME decode of the message. That's also why the non-raw message looks fine: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20200228095819.10750-2-david@xxxxxxxxxx/ because the raw message data has the proper encoding information. In contrast, look at the email that Andrew sent me and that I complained about: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20200329021719.MBKzW0xSl%25akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ and notice how that *non-raw* email has that Withou= t pattern in it. And when you look at the raw one: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20200329021719.MBKzW0xSl%25akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/raw it has no content transfer encoding line in the headers. Linus
