On Wed, 11 Aug 2021, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 10:16:41AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: >> On Tue, 10 Aug 2021, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 09:19:39AM -0700, Matt Roper wrote: >> >> On Mon, Aug 09, 2021 at 04:05:59PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> >> > On Fri, Aug 06, 2021 at 09:36:56AM +0300, Joonas Lahtinen wrote: >> >> > > Hi Matt, >> >> > > >> >> > > Always use the dim tooling when applying patches, it will do the right >> >> > > thing with regards to adding the S-o-b. >> >> > >> >> > fd.o server rejects any pushes that haven't been done by dim, so how did >> >> > this get through? >> >> >> >> I definitely used dim for all of these patches, but I'm not sure how I >> >> lost my s-o-b on this one. Maybe when I edited the commit message after >> >> 'dim extract-tags' I accidentally deleted an extra line when I removed >> >> the extract-tags marker? It's the only patch where the line is missing, >> >> so it's almost certainly human error on my part rather than something >> >> dim did wrong. >> > >> > Yeah that's an expected failure model, and dim is supposed to catch that >> > by rechecking for sobs when you push. See dim_push_branch -> >> > checkpatch_commit_push_range in dim. So you can hand-edit stuff however >> > you want, dim /should/ catch it when pushing. That it didn't is kinda >> > confusing and I'd like to know why that slipped through. >> >> One of the failures that happened here was that the commit was part of a >> topic branch that was merged and pushed directly. All merges should >> happen via pull requests on the list, and applied (preferrably by >> maintainers or at least with their acks recorded on the merge) using dim >> apply-pull which should also have the checks. > > Ah yes if the merge is applied directly instead of using apply-pull then > that's not good. I guess that's why we have the rule that only maintainers > should handle topic branches ... > > Not sure how we can fix this in dim? Maybe a check whether the patches > your pushing contain a merge commit, which prompts an additional query > like > > "Merge commits should only be done by repo maintainers, not committers. > Confirm that you are a maintainer of $repo?" > > It's not the first time this slipped through and caused some fun. Similar > to how we have the confirmation check if you push a lot of patches. I sent an untested patch to this effect. It's a start. I guess there could be more detailed automated checks, but frankly dim is getting pretty complicated for a bash script. Or because it's a bash script. BR, Jani. > > Thoughts? > -Daniel > > >> >> >> BR, >> Jani. >> >> > >> >> > Matt, can you pls figure out and type up the patch to >> >> > plug that hole? >> >> >> >> Are you referring to a patch for dim here? The i915 patch has already >> >> landed, so we can't change its commit message now. >> > >> > Yeah dim, not drm-intel, that can't be fixed anymore because it's all >> > baked in. >> > -Daniel >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Matt >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Thanks, Daniel >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > Regards, Joonas >> >> > > >> >> > > Quoting Stephen Rothwell (2021-07-15 07:18:54) >> >> > > > Hi all, >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Commit >> >> > > > >> >> > > > db47fe727e1f ("drm/i915/step: s/<platform>_revid_tbl/<platform>_revids") >> >> > > > >> >> > > > is missing a Signed-off-by from its committer. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > -- >> >> > > > Cheers, >> >> > > > Stephen Rothwell >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Daniel Vetter >> >> > Software Engineer, Intel Corporation >> >> > http://blog.ffwll.ch >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Matt Roper >> >> Graphics Software Engineer >> >> VTT-OSGC Platform Enablement >> >> Intel Corporation >> >> (916) 356-2795 >> >> -- >> Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center