From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B601CC433F5 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 02:30:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D48761073 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 02:30:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229907AbhKDCcu (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Nov 2021 22:32:50 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:17925 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229541AbhKDCcu (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Nov 2021 22:32:50 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10157"; a="218828214" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.87,207,1631602800"; d="scan'208";a="218828214" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Nov 2021 19:30:13 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.87,207,1631602800"; d="scan'208";a="501353302" Received: from shao2-debian.sh.intel.com (HELO [10.239.13.108]) ([10.239.13.108]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Nov 2021 19:30:10 -0700 Subject: Re: [kbuild-all] Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] ACPI: APEI: Reserve the MCFG address for quirk ECAM implementation To: Bjorn Helgaas , kernel test robot , kbuild-all-owner@lists.01.org Cc: Xuesong Chen , kbuild-all@lists.01.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Konstantin Ryabitsev References: <20211101171533.GA527894@bhelgaas> From: Rong Chen Message-ID: <796ba27b-20b9-3c6b-d2af-495e98397599@intel.com> Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2021 10:30:08 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/78.0 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20211101171533.GA527894@bhelgaas> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On 11/2/21 1:15 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > [+cc linux-pci, Konstantin, since you're thinking about this area, too] > > The 0-day bot seems to remove mailing lists from the recipient list, > which means reports like the one below don't become part of the public > email thread and don't get connected to the patch in patchwork. I > think this is a problem. > > For example here are Xuesong's original patch, the patch in patchwork, > and the 0-day bot report: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211027081312.53682-1-xuesong.chen@linux.alibaba.com/ > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pci/patch/20211027081312.53682-1-xuesong.chen@linux.alibaba.com/ > https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all@lists.01.org/thread/QISVC5TJIHTEMAPX7T7YXOZEDS5CBURY/ > > Neither the lore link nor the patchwork have any indication that the > 0-day bot found a problem. > > It looks like the 0-day bot sent the report to all the individual > recipients from the original patch, but it ADDED these recipients: > > llvm@lists.linux.dev > kbuild-all@lists.01.org > > and REMOVED these: > > linux-pci@vger.kernel.org > linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Gmail filed Xuesong's original patch and the 0-day report as spam. > That's a problem on my end, but the bigger problem is that I work from > the patchwork queue, which has no indication of the problem. > > I'm sure you have a reason for removing the mailing lists. Should we > revisit that? Should I be approaching this a different way? > > If a *person* responds to a patch on the list, I expect a reply-all so > the response becomes part of the thread. Why should the 0-day bot be > different? Hi Bjorn, Sorry for the inconvenience, we expect replying to the mailing lists too, it should be a problem in 0-day side. Best Regards, Rong Chen > > I added linux-pci to cc, but since the 0-day report didn't go to the > list, I don't think this message will be threaded correctly on lore. > It should be part of > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211027081035.53370-1-xuesong.chen@linux.alibaba.com/ > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 06:46:16AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> Hi Xuesong, >> >> Thank you for the patch! Perhaps something to improve: >> >> [auto build test WARNING on helgaas-pci/next] >> [also build test WARNING on rafael-pm/linux-next tip/x86/core arm64/for-next/core v5.15-rc7 next-20211027] >> [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. >> And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in >> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch] >> >> url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Xuesong-Chen/PCI-MCFG-Consolidate-the-separate-PCI-MCFG-table-entry-list/20211027-171229 >> base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git next >> config: x86_64-randconfig-s022-20211027 (attached as .config) >> compiler: gcc-9 (Debian 9.3.0-22) 9.3.0 >> reproduce: >> # apt-get install sparse >> # sparse version: v0.6.4-dirty >> # https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/8fce66d9da6f8e55c5cf0dda4a13dba6bd51492d >> git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux >> git fetch --no-tags linux-review Xuesong-Chen/PCI-MCFG-Consolidate-the-separate-PCI-MCFG-table-entry-list/20211027-171229 >> git checkout 8fce66d9da6f8e55c5cf0dda4a13dba6bd51492d >> # save the attached .config to linux build tree >> make W=1 C=1 CF='-fdiagnostic-prefix -D__CHECK_ENDIAN__' O=build_dir ARCH=x86_64 SHELL=/bin/bash drivers/acpi/apei/ >> >> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate >> Reported-by: kernel test robot >> >> >> sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) >>>> drivers/acpi/apei/apei-base.c:453:5: sparse: sparse: symbol 'remove_quirk_mcfg_res' was not declared. Should it be static? >> drivers/acpi/apei/apei-base.c:804:12: sparse: sparse: symbol 'arch_apei_enable_cmcff' was not declared. Should it be static? >> drivers/acpi/apei/apei-base.c:811:13: sparse: sparse: symbol 'arch_apei_report_mem_error' was not declared. Should it be static? >> >> Please review and possibly fold the followup patch. >> >> --- >> 0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation >> https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all@lists.01.org > _______________________________________________ > kbuild-all mailing list -- kbuild-all@lists.01.org > To unsubscribe send an email to kbuild-all-leave@lists.01.org