Acked-by missed when applying

Acked-by missed when applying

[Lee Jones]

Good morning Konstantin,

Can you think of a reason why `b4` missed Greg's Ack here?

https://lore.kernel.org/all/YVLA14jbwqXjNM2f@kroah.com/

```
+ b4 am -3 -slt -P_ -o -
'<1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>'
+ git am
Looking up https://lore.kernel.org/r/1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab%2Bhuawei%40kernel.org
Analyzing 2 messages in the thread
Checking attestation on all messages, may take a moment...
---
  ✓ [PATCH v2] mfd: hi6421-spmi-pmic: cleanup drvdata
    + Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
    + Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org
  ---
  ✓ Signed: DKIM/kernel.org
---
Total patches: 1 (cherrypicked:
<1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>)
Prepared a fake commit range for 3-way merge (a0fd2a641207..b603f718647d)
---
 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org
 Base: applies clean to current tree
```

Thanks.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Senior Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: Acked-by missed when applying

[Rob Herring]

On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 3:02 AM Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> Good morning Konstantin,
>
> Can you think of a reason why `b4` missed Greg's Ack here?

Because you applied the first v2 patch, not the second v2 threaded to
the 1st one that Greg acked.

>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/YVLA14jbwqXjNM2f@kroah.com/
>
> ```
> + b4 am -3 -slt -P_ -o -
> '<1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>'
> + git am
> Looking up https://lore.kernel.org/r/1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab%2Bhuawei%40kernel.org
> Analyzing 2 messages in the thread
> Checking attestation on all messages, may take a moment...
> ---
>   ✓ [PATCH v2] mfd: hi6421-spmi-pmic: cleanup drvdata
>     + Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
>     + Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org
>   ---
>   ✓ Signed: DKIM/kernel.org
> ---
> Total patches: 1 (cherrypicked:
> <1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>)
> Prepared a fake commit range for 3-way merge (a0fd2a641207..b603f718647d)
> ---
>  Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org
>  Base: applies clean to current tree
> ```
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Lee Jones [李琼斯]
> Linaro Services Senior Technical Lead
> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
> Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
>

Re: Acked-by missed when applying

[Konstantin Ryabitsev]

On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 07:22:00AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 3:02 AM Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > Good morning Konstantin,
> >
> > Can you think of a reason why `b4` missed Greg's Ack here?
> 
> Because you applied the first v2 patch, not the second v2 threaded to
> the 1st one that Greg acked.

Should we issue a warning in such cases? E.g:

WARNING: Identically numbered patches found, will use the latest by date.
         Download and edit the mailbox manually for any other outcome.

-K

Re: Acked-by missed when applying

[Lee Jones]

On Tue, 05 Oct 2021, Rob Herring wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 3:02 AM Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > Good morning Konstantin,
> >
> > Can you think of a reason why `b4` missed Greg's Ack here?
> 
> Because you applied the first v2 patch, not the second v2 threaded to
> the 1st one that Greg acked.

Not sure I understand.

This is the thread of the patch I merged:

https://i.imgur.com/k4hD9kO.png

Greg's Ack is located in the 5th message down.

> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/YVLA14jbwqXjNM2f@kroah.com/
> >
> > ```
> > + b4 am -3 -slt -P_ -o -
> > '<1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>'
> > + git am
> > Looking up https://lore.kernel.org/r/1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab%2Bhuawei%40kernel.org
> > Analyzing 2 messages in the thread
> > Checking attestation on all messages, may take a moment...
> > ---
> >   ✓ [PATCH v2] mfd: hi6421-spmi-pmic: cleanup drvdata
> >     + Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
> >     + Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org
> >   ---
> >   ✓ Signed: DKIM/kernel.org
> > ---
> > Total patches: 1 (cherrypicked:
> > <1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>)
> > Prepared a fake commit range for 3-way merge (a0fd2a641207..b603f718647d)
> > ---
> >  Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1828cb783b1ebca0b98bf0b3077d8701adb228f7.1630586862.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org
> >  Base: applies clean to current tree
> > ```
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: Acked-by missed when applying

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 535 bytes --]

On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 08:45:36AM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 07:22:00AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:

> > Because you applied the first v2 patch, not the second v2 threaded to
> > the 1st one that Greg acked.

> Should we issue a warning in such cases? E.g:

> WARNING: Identically numbered patches found, will use the latest by date.
>          Download and edit the mailbox manually for any other outcome.

Please!  In general the messages b4 prints when it resolves any
ambiguity are really helpful.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: Acked-by missed when applying

[Konstantin Ryabitsev]

On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 01:48:04PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > Can you think of a reason why `b4` missed Greg's Ack here?
> > 
> > Because you applied the first v2 patch, not the second v2 threaded to
> > the 1st one that Greg acked.
> 
> Not sure I understand.
> 
> This is the thread of the patch I merged:
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/k4hD9kO.png
> 
> Greg's Ack is located in the 5th message down.

If you look at the thread overview, you'll notice that there are two messages
with identical subjects, sent 3 weeks apart:

2021-09-02 12:47 [PATCH v2] mfd: hi6421-spmi-pmic: cleanup drvdata

and

2021-09-28  6:58 [PATCH v2] mfd: hi6421-spmi-pmic: cleanup drvdata

As far as b4 is treating things internally, the second v2 (from Sep 28)
starts a new thread, so any trailers sent to the Sep-02 version will not
apply to the Sep-29 version and vice versa.

-K

Re: Acked-by missed when applying

[Lee Jones]

On Tue, 05 Oct 2021, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 01:48:04PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > Can you think of a reason why `b4` missed Greg's Ack here?
> > > 
> > > Because you applied the first v2 patch, not the second v2 threaded to
> > > the 1st one that Greg acked.
> > 
> > Not sure I understand.
> > 
> > This is the thread of the patch I merged:
> > 
> > https://i.imgur.com/k4hD9kO.png
> > 
> > Greg's Ack is located in the 5th message down.
> 
> If you look at the thread overview, you'll notice that there are two messages
> with identical subjects, sent 3 weeks apart:
> 
> 2021-09-02 12:47 [PATCH v2] mfd: hi6421-spmi-pmic: cleanup drvdata
> 
> and
> 
> 2021-09-28  6:58 [PATCH v2] mfd: hi6421-spmi-pmic: cleanup drvdata
> 
> As far as b4 is treating things internally, the second v2 (from Sep 28)
> starts a new thread, so any trailers sent to the Sep-02 version will not
> apply to the Sep-29 version and vice versa.

Oh I see.

That's not obvious from Mutt or LORE:

  https://i.imgur.com/vFNfGYw.png

Thanks Rob, Konstantin for the explanation.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: Acked-by missed when applying

[Lee Jones]

On Tue, 05 Oct 2021, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 07:22:00AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 3:02 AM Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Good morning Konstantin,
> > >
> > > Can you think of a reason why `b4` missed Greg's Ack here?
> > 
> > Because you applied the first v2 patch, not the second v2 threaded to
> > the 1st one that Greg acked.
> 
> Should we issue a warning in such cases? E.g:
> 
> WARNING: Identically numbered patches found, will use the latest by date.
>          Download and edit the mailbox manually for any other outcome.

Definitely.  Thanks.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Re: Acked-by missed when applying

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 01:49:29PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 08:45:36AM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 07:22:00AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> 
> > > Because you applied the first v2 patch, not the second v2 threaded to
> > > the 1st one that Greg acked.
> 
> > Should we issue a warning in such cases? E.g:
> 
> > WARNING: Identically numbered patches found, will use the latest by date.
> >          Download and edit the mailbox manually for any other outcome.
> 
> Please!  In general the messages b4 prints when it resolves any
> ambiguity are really helpful.

+1.  If b4 could give us the message id's and message time stamps,
that would be great.  Even better, perhaps b4 could download both, and
diff the two patches, which might give us some clue if it was just the
same patch accidentally sent twice, or change in the commit
description (maybe the sender forgot to add some trailers?), or the
commit diffs are actually different, in which case maybe the sender
forgot to increment the version number.

						- Ted

Re: Acked-by missed when applying

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Em Tue, 5 Oct 2021 08:53:28 -0400
Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org> escreveu:

> On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 01:48:04PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > Can you think of a reason why `b4` missed Greg's Ack here?  
> > > 
> > > Because you applied the first v2 patch, not the second v2 threaded to
> > > the 1st one that Greg acked.  
> > 
> > Not sure I understand.
> > 
> > This is the thread of the patch I merged:
> > 
> > https://i.imgur.com/k4hD9kO.png
> > 
> > Greg's Ack is located in the 5th message down.  
> 
> If you look at the thread overview, you'll notice that there are two messages
> with identical subjects, sent 3 weeks apart:
> 
> 2021-09-02 12:47 [PATCH v2] mfd: hi6421-spmi-pmic: cleanup drvdata
> 
> and
> 
> 2021-09-28  6:58 [PATCH v2] mfd: hi6421-spmi-pmic: cleanup drvdata
> 
> As far as b4 is treating things internally, the second v2 (from Sep 28)
> starts a new thread, so any trailers sent to the Sep-02 version will not
> apply to the Sep-29 version and vice versa.

The patch is actually identical (and I guess it is also identical
to version 1). I ended forgetting that I had already submitted it during
the merge window. So, I ended forgetting to either increase its version
number or to add a RESEND to it.

Sorry for the mess.


> > WARNING: Identically numbered patches found, will use the latest by date.
> >          Download and edit the mailbox manually for any other outcome.  

> Please!  In general the messages b4 prints when it resolves any
> ambiguity are really helpful.

+1

Thanks,
Mauro

Re: Acked-by missed when applying

[Lee Jones]

On Tue, 05 Oct 2021, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:

> Em Tue, 5 Oct 2021 08:53:28 -0400
> Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org> escreveu:
> 
> > On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 01:48:04PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > > Can you think of a reason why `b4` missed Greg's Ack here?  
> > > > 
> > > > Because you applied the first v2 patch, not the second v2 threaded to
> > > > the 1st one that Greg acked.  
> > > 
> > > Not sure I understand.
> > > 
> > > This is the thread of the patch I merged:
> > > 
> > > https://i.imgur.com/k4hD9kO.png
> > > 
> > > Greg's Ack is located in the 5th message down.  
> > 
> > If you look at the thread overview, you'll notice that there are two messages
> > with identical subjects, sent 3 weeks apart:
> > 
> > 2021-09-02 12:47 [PATCH v2] mfd: hi6421-spmi-pmic: cleanup drvdata
> > 
> > and
> > 
> > 2021-09-28  6:58 [PATCH v2] mfd: hi6421-spmi-pmic: cleanup drvdata
> > 
> > As far as b4 is treating things internally, the second v2 (from Sep 28)
> > starts a new thread, so any trailers sent to the Sep-02 version will not
> > apply to the Sep-29 version and vice versa.
> 
> The patch is actually identical (and I guess it is also identical
> to version 1). I ended forgetting that I had already submitted it during
> the merge window. So, I ended forgetting to either increase its version
> number or to add a RESEND to it.
> 
> Sorry for the mess.

If it wasn't you, it would have been someone else.

Thanks for highlighting issue.

Hopefully it can be resolved trivially.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog