Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] io_uring: minor clean up in trace events definition

From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
To: Olivier Langlois <olivier@trillion01.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] io_uring: minor clean up in trace events definition
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:33:41 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <902fdad6-4011-07fc-ea0e-5bac4e34d7bc@kernel.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1cf91b2f760686678acfbefcc66309cd061986d5.camel@trillion01.com>

On 6/16/21 3:30 PM, Olivier Langlois wrote:
> On Wed, 2021-06-16 at 13:02 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On 6/16/21 1:00 PM, Olivier Langlois wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2021-06-16 at 06:49 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, that is what is causing the situation, and I do have them
>>>> here.
>>>> Olivier, you definitely want to fix your mail setup. It confuses
>>>> both
>>>> MUAs, but it also actively prevents using the regular tooling to
>>>> pull
>>>> these patches off lore for example.
>>>>
>>> Ok, I will... It seems that only my patch emails are having this
>>> issue.
>>> I am pretty sure that I can find instances of non patch emails
>>> going
>>> making it to the lists...
>>
>> The problem is that even if they do make it to the list, you can't
>> use eg b4 to pull them off the list.
>>
> Jens,
> 
> I am unfamiliar with the regular tooling and eg b4 (which I assume are
> part of the regular tooling) so I am not fully understanding everything
> you say.

Sorry, I could have been more clear. b4 is a tool that pulls patches off
lists managed by lore.kernel.org, and I use it quite often to avoid
manually saving emails and applying. It'll collect reviews etc as well,
and I integrate it with git. That means, if you send a patchset of 3
patches with a cover letter, if I like the series I just do:

$ git b4 <message id of cover>

and it applies it for me, adding links, reviews, etc.

> My take away from all this is that it is very important that my patches
> do reach the lists and I commit to put the necessary efforts to make
> that happen.

Yes. Both for tooling, but also so that non-cc'ed people see it and can
reply.

> My last email was simply myself starting diagnose where my problem
> could be outloud.
> 
> Steven did mention that he wasn't seeing the Message-Id field in my
> patch emails. I'm very grateful for this clue!
> 
> My main email client is Gnome Evolution (when Message-Id is present in
> my mails) and I do the following to send out patches:
> 
> 1. git format-patch -o ~/patches HEAD^
> 2. Edit patch file by adding recipients listed by
> scripts/get_maintainer.pl
> 3. cat patch_file | msmtp -t -a default

Why not just use git send-email? That's literally what that is for. It's
what I use to send out patches.

> The weird thing is that when I have noticed that my patches weren't
> making it to the lists, I started to Cc myself to receive a copy of the
> patch. When I inspect the copy header, it contains the Message-Id field
> but it might be the receiving email client that on reception does add
> the missing field so I don't know exactly what is happening.
> 
> you have my word. Next patch I send, it will be make it to the lists.
> 
> thx a lot for your comprehension and your assistance!

Thanks for sending out patches!

-- 
Jens Axboe