On 5/27/2025 2:25 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
Hi, So I'm probably preaching to the choir, because those who don't pay attention won't read the list either, but still ... Please everyone look at the patchwork dashboard: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ You can filter by yourself, e.g. for me: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/?submitter=90 (but that list is empty now for me) If you have _red_ items there reported by the CI bot, I'm most likely simply not going to apply your patches. I _might_ if I care enough to fix the issues. This also depends on the timing, if it's with a lot of time left (like right), then there's plenty of time to resend. If you have _yellow_ items there reported by the CI bot, I'm going to read that and I might decide to fix small issues such as spelling myself, but I really prefer not to, it makes things go smoother. Not all the yellow items always make sense, especially checkpatch. And I guess it needs to be said, but since these results are public, I feel silly manually requesting that people change the (obvious) things that were pointed out by the CI bot. I think I'll just start marking as "changes requested" semi-automatically. Ideally everyone would build an internal workflow that checks this before, even the NIPA bot itself can be run pretty easily with the docker container (we still do that internally before sending to the list, even though we run the list instance now as well.) But I'll grant that not everyone can set it up and have enough hardware to throw at it, that's why the public version exists. Please? :)
Concur with your thoughts here. However, I just want to bring one point related to _Dependencies_.
In case of Dependency (Depends-on tag) between series (even from the same tree), the bots - kernel as well as the NIPA, currently does not handle it gracefully and in such cases there could be legitimate build failures reported since obviously the declarations are in parent series which is not taken by the bots. So in such cases, _red_ items will be there.
Do you have any suggestions on how we should go about handling dependencies?
-- Aditya
