From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5FED1591 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 14:01:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pg1-f196.google.com (mail-pg1-f196.google.com [209.85.215.196]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C4FF88E for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 14:01:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg1-f196.google.com with SMTP id w10so12753655pgj.7 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2019 07:01:30 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Guenter Roeck To: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Dmitry Vyukov References: <20190826230206.GC28066@mit.edu> <20190827134836.GB25038@kroah.com> From: Guenter Roeck Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 07:01:26 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190827134836.GB25038@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Joel Fernandes , Barret Rhoden , ksummit , Jonathan Nieder , Tomasz Figa , Han-Wen Nienhuys , Theodore Tso , David Rientjes , Dmitry Torokhov Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Allowing something Change-Id (or something like it) in kernel commits List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 8/27/19 6:48 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 06:24:36AM -0700, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 11:06 PM Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, 26 Aug 2019, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >>>> A somewhat related point re UUID/Change-ID. >>>> For syzbot (or any other bug tracking system) we want to associate >>>> bugs with fixes. It turned out there is no good identity of a change >>>> that we could use. Commit hash is an obvious first thing to consider, >>>> but (1) it changes in linux-next, (2) sometimes the change is not >>>> committed yet when we do the association, (3) it is different when >>>> backported to LTS (so not possible to say if a fix is in that stable >>>> tree or not). >>>> We decided to use commit subject, which works to some degree, but also >>>> has problems: (1) not necessary unique, (2) sometimes people change >>>> subject during backporting (e.g. prepend some prefix), (3) has all the >>>> same problems of email clients messing with text (e.g. I can't issue >>>> #syz fix command for loo long commit subjects with my email client). >>>> Some real UUID/Change-ID would solve all of these problems by giving >>>> us capability to refer to changes rather than a commit in a particular >>>> tree only. >>> >>> If we adopt the Link: ..../$MSG tag widely then you have a UUID. >> >> Is there a way to ensure that everybody will generate right IDs >> (ChangeID-Version) and then a link in canonical form will be included >> into commit? As far as I understand this is not possible with the >> current kernel tooling, as this aspect is not under control of any >> unified tooling. >> I see different maintainers use links to different archive web sites. >> Also sometimes Link is present for other reasons (e.g. link to bug >> report). >> The link will need to be added by every developer (rather than >> maintainer) so that it's available before the change is committed >> anywhere. > > For subsystems I maintain, I am already adding the Link: tag to > lore.kernel.org with the message id in it. That is automatically added > by my scripts. > >> Though, most of these are problems for any other change identification scheme... > > Note, we have 4000+ developers every year, it's hard enough to get them > all to agree on major things, let alone crazy stuff like this :) > Is it really that crazy ? I have to use a combination of subject analysis and patch content analysis using fuzzy text / string comparison, combined with an analysis of the patch description, to answer a simple question: Is this patch upstream, and what is its upstream SHA ? Having a UUID tag would make this a simple and straightforward operation. What is crazy is having to do all this analysis. Guenter