Re: [PATCH 1/6] thermal: split thermal_zone_of_sensor_register{,_param}()

[Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>]

Hi Marek,

On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 6:49 PM Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/16/2018 06:42 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 6:25 PM Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 12/16/2018 09:39 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 9:13 PM Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 12/15/2018 09:00 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 8:07 PM Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On 12/15/2018 07:54 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 7:49 PM Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On 12/15/2018 07:47 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 15, 2018 at 7:38 PM Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On 12/15/2018 06:23 PM, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 02:49:22AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Introduce new thermal_zone_of_sensor_register_params() function, which
> >>>>>>>>>>>> allows passing struct thermal_zone_params into it and convert original
> >>>>>>>>>>>> thermal_zone_of_sensor_register() to call it with params set to NULL.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+renesas@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Git complains about mismatch between From: and this SOB.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I recall a discussion about gmail stripping the +foo tags from email
> >>>>>>>>>> addresses. I can add a From: tag into the patch to override this
> >>>>>>>>>> braindeath, or is there a better solution ?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Run the "git format-patch" command from a git repo where user.email
> >>>>>>>>> is marek.vasut@gmail.com, so it will retain the original From: tag in the
> >>>>>>>>> email body, as it is different?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I can also manually patch the From tags or add them, but it's all
> >>>>>>>> workarounds.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Use a different outgoing email server? I use my ISP's.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Or maybe it'd make sense to fix git to handle the +tags correctly ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What needs to be fixed?
> >>>>> If user.email != From, git format-patch generates a From: header, else
> >>>>> it doesn't. Doesn't that make sense?
> >>>>
> >>>> I believe the complaint here is that email address in From does not
> >>>> match email address in SoB line, because some SMTP servers scrub the
> >>>> +foo tag from From: and not from SoB-line . And yet, the SoB line is
> >>>
> >>> Some SMTP servers (Hi Gmail!) scrub the +foo tag from the From: _header_
> >>> in the email. As the SoB is in the _body_ it is not affected.
> >>> Hence the solution is to include the correct From: in the _body_.
> >>
> >> This is basically what I said.
> >>
> >>> Git actually does that automatically, assumed your user.email config matches
> >>> the From: address that is used in your outgoing email delivery path (i.e. the
> >>> scrubbed one, when using Gmail's SMTP server).
> >>> If you lie to git in your user.email config, git cannot do the right
> >>> thing, obviously.
> >>
> >> My git user.email obviously matches the From: field , before the
> >> scrubbing, which I believe is the correct thing to do.
> >
> > I disagree, because that is not how the emails are actually going out from the
> > SMTP server you are using.
>
> Can you summarize, clearly, what you believe is the right thing to
> configure and where ?

According to git-send-email(1), you can either pass your scrubbed email
address to --from, or configure it in the sendemail.from config option.
Does that work for you?

> >>>> from the same person/email address as the email address in From, so they
> >>>> are equal.
> >>>
> >>> If they differ, they are not equal ;-)
> >>
> >> Depends on how you define 'equal' . Here I think foo+bar@example.com
> >> should be considered equal to foo@example.com .
> >
> > That is domain-specific knowledge, which you cannot rely upon.

> >> Aha, so maybe that enhancement needs further enhancement to scrub the
> >> +tags before the check ?
> >
> > Again, that is domain-specific knowledge, which you cannot rely upon.
>
> How so, please elaborate .

In general, you cannot assume the "+foo" part can be ignored. Only the sender
knows.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds