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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 216C6C10F14 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:53:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5471214E0 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 19:53:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1570737218; bh=tTp6l6cNm1Xo+WxGGwKMqPxDRftrGZFrzohRqLRZJF4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=MjTc8NyADuPYnR2e+2q4YPIIQ1OGT5fluwpavcVCosZ3xrEC5OkE8pGxBMKlUpNZs VogK+KocAnuVhnd3CBkAu72ORBlV2R1lu/V5OYg4LNasxQJ2Uu7WYZMQS3WAM7Cxbb J8LRwBc9XuubJg0MvUalJVQyUKRqyslkMgZAsDAE= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726017AbfJJTxi (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:53:38 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-f175.google.com ([209.85.160.175]:37351 "EHLO mail-qt1-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725867AbfJJTxi (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:53:38 -0400 Received: by mail-qt1-f175.google.com with SMTP id l51so10218640qtc.4 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 12:53:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=UanhrXCFQqTjy69ystGpZ88HCo/HssMqgcb/FjevumM=; b=dxRl9r+oec9ZIgaMig42eYBiqZZLh2+NRGYpFeV/qJ4OI75O86HgudXuLF99+6rFfC cDv4h1qr6MzYoHmQcm3aS0vW6FaCRO1CMRH0KoPEcNAEN2afW+C7HrHEmMGJv6CFV3aE vmS0EGZyfRGTW0x+9OgDTxRab4d5Sehqg451Y= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=UanhrXCFQqTjy69ystGpZ88HCo/HssMqgcb/FjevumM=; b=QkMUmV509PWquSzyUoQri7q09KR1r2fj15OUNHj+IFkL5INuTZzV4KtnPdQrE/0JB/ 3aujxOW2XvBnGlzF+4PcB0+MD1/2A2OOqY67/FV/ki9hJRIK14SgZ57LJMKjp+2kmibt VMLmjWb/3UxYqBApScoveyoOEDw5bp8PQ5McBnJxpI90Ya10cnldphzT+m/4nEaIt2pu MfOCg8ORcWNUk9GYlMh60nPlQ/gPkOFlFt6FMcBKMCrldOsLQQTI+M8nw5U8D3R5Lms8 qksI+N+0ccNEQUR/T4cfBRRV2fakfWjypp/32vVt9DoWChYbfD2A6yqTyrWFH5UD/pRx p2Og== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXCZRHL7uwBDWWzCzxQlMq2mxmSrAqNJnDRCDyQlp3Ql3bXII0D x6SGPQ2OadGtFCUdNkgYFXLU+Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyLLR9dHCPnz3SQlozgidSPf38p21/8go1Wi/TUZ9Cvv4SOSRN5Gh8YH7yhdEdgMXAS5yRcYg== X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4112:: with SMTP id i18mr12160896qvp.21.1570737217100; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 12:53:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chatter.i7.local (192-0-228-88.cpe.teksavvy.com. [192.0.228.88]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e13sm2719960qkm.110.2019.10.10.12.53.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 10 Oct 2019 12:53:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 15:53:35 -0400 From: Konstantin Ryabitsev To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab Cc: patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFE: use patchwork to submit a patch Message-ID: <20191010195335.fmh6atylozhehftt@chatter.i7.local> Mail-Followup-To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , patchwork@lists.ozlabs.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org References: <20191010144150.hqiosvwolm3lmzp5@chatter.i7.local> <20191010150729.1355f33d@coco.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191010150729.1355f33d@coco.lan> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 Sender: workflows-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 03:07:29PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: >> - the patch submission screen has a succession of screens: >> >> 1. a screen with a single field allowing a user to paste a URL to >> their fork of the git repository. > >This will raise the bar, as it will force all developers to have a >public site to host the tree. I guess only a fraction of the 4k kernel >devs have it... In special, the ones that just want to send us a patch >fixing a bug may have serious troubles implementing that. I don't think this will raise the bar, as Github/Gitlab allow for very easy forking of https://github.com/torvalds/linux. This is also not at all aimed at "all developers" -- only those that don't want to use the current CLI workflow and are more comfortable with web tools like Github. >> 2. next screen asks the user to select the ref to work from using >> the >> list obtained from the remote. Once submitted, patchwork performs a >> `git clone --reference` to clone the repository locally using a >> local fork of the same repo to minimize object transfer. This part >> requires that: >> a. patchwork project is configured with a path to a local fork, >> if this feature is enabled for a project >> b. that fork is kept current via some mechanism outside of >> patchwork (e.g. with grokmirror) >> c. there is some sanity-checking during the clone process to >> avoid abuse (e.g. a sane timeout, a tmpdir with limited size, >> etc -- other suggestions welcome) > >That would require a high bandwidth at the machine with as patchwork. >Also, doesn't sound a good idea to me, as the server may end by having >tons of open sections, most waiting for tens of minutes, in order to >complete git clone. This is actually really fast if you already have a local copy of the repository with most objects. Try this yourself if you have torvalds/linux.git locally: git clone --bare -s torvalds/linux.git test cd test git remote add arm-soc https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm/arm-soc git fetch arm-soc for-next The whole process takes a second or so and the resulting repo is 328K in size. Of course, this assumes that the remote repository isn't trying to do something nasty, which is why I suggest anti-abuse precautions. >> I know this is a pretty big RFE, and I would like to hear your >> thoughts >> about this. If there is general agreement that this is doable/good idea, >> I may be able to come up with funding for this development as part of >> the overall tooling improvement proposal. > >The procedure itself is not bad, but, if implemented, IMHO, it should, >instead, be something that will run at the machine of the one submitting >the patch. For instance, this could be a perl or python script inside >Kernel's ./script directory that would handle everything locally, and >then submit the patch via patchwork's REST API. I think I didn't make clear that this isn't supposed to go straight to patchwork. Patchwork is merely a convenient tool where this happens -- the resulting patch gets mailed out to the mailing list just as the user would have done. -K