Rong Chen <rong.a.chen@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 11/28/19 2:23 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 10:29:52PM +0800, Philip Li wrote: >>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 12:36:50PM +0000, Kalle Valo wrote: >>>> kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>>> >>>>> Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve: >>>>> >>>>> [auto build test WARNING on wireless-drivers-next/master] >>>>> [also build test WARNING on v5.4-rc8 next-20191122] >>>>> [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help >>>>> improve the system. BTW, we also suggest to use '--base' option to specify the >>>>> base tree in git format-patch, please see https://stackoverflow.com/a/37406982] >>>>> >>>>> url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/huangwenabc-gmail-com/libertas-Fix-two-buffer-overflows-at-parsing-bss-descriptor/20191124-142236 >>>>> base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/wireless-drivers-next.git master >>>>> config: sh-allmodconfig (attached as .config) >>>>> compiler: sh4-linux-gcc (GCC) 7.4.0 >>>>> reproduce: >>>>> wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross >>>>> chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross >>>>> # save the attached .config to linux build tree >>>>> GCC_VERSION=7.4.0 make.cross ARCH=sh >>>>> >>>>> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag >>>>> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): >>>>> >>>>> drivers/net/wireless/marvell/libertas/cfg.c: In function 'lbs_ibss_join_existing': >>>>>>> drivers/net/wireless/marvell/libertas/cfg.c:1788:3: warning: ISO C90 forbids mixed declarations and code [-Wdeclaration-after-statement] >>>> I was wondering why I didn't see this mail in patchwork: >>>> >>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11257187/ >>>> >>>> And then I noticed this: >>>> >>>> X-Patchwork-Hint: ignore >>>> >>>> kbuild team, why are you adding that header? It's really bad for a >>> thanks for the feedback, early on we received another feedback to suggest >>> for adding this, refer to >>> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/patchwork-fdo/patchwork-fdo/issues/21 >>> for detail. Since there's no further input regarding this usage, we keep >>> that flag. If this is not suitable, we can investigate other way to fullfill >>> both requirements. >>> >> I second Kalle's comment; this is really bad. >> >> Note that the above referenced link suggested to add >> X-Patchwork-Hint: comment >> to e-mail headers. Instead, you added: >> X-Patchwork-Hint: ignore >> which is substantially different. Also, the problem was with a _patch_ >> sent by the robot, not with direct feedback. On top of that, the >> suggestion was really to add "X-Patchwork-Hint: comment" to _patches_ >> sent by the robot, not to everything. It should be fine to add >> "X-Patchwork-Hint: ignore" to patches only as long as other feedback >> is still provided and added to patchwork. That should meet all >> requirements. >> >> Thanks, >> Guenter > > Hi Kalle, Guenter > > Thanks so much for your help, we have removed the hint header in build > report mails and still keep it in patch mails. This is now working perfectly, here's a recent example: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11431301/ I cannot stress enough how much seeing kbuild bot warning in patchwork helps my work as a maintainer. So thank you Guenter for the support and Rong fixing it! -- https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
