Messages in this thread | | | From | Dmitry Vyukov <> | Date | Thu, 2 Mar 2023 10:11:32 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] checkpatch: warn when Reported-by: is not followed by Link: |
| |
On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 at 10:04, Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info> wrote: > > On 02.03.23 09:27, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 at 06:40, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 06:17:22 +0100 Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >>> On 02.03.23 05:46, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > >>>> On Fri, 20 Jan 2023 13:35:19 +0100 Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >>>>> Encourage patch authors to link to reports by issuing a warning, if > >>>>> a Reported-by: is not accompanied by a link to the report. Those links > >>>>> are often extremely useful for any code archaeologist that wants to know > >>>>> more about the backstory of a change than the commit message provides. > >>>>> That includes maintainers higher up in the patch-flow hierarchy, which > >>>>> is why Linus asks developers to add such links [1, 2, 3]. To quote [1]: > >>>> > >>>> Is it okay if we exclude syzbot reports from this rule? > >>>> If full syzbot report ID is provided - it's as good as a link. > >>> > >>> Hmmm. Not sure. Every special case makes things harder for humans and > >>> software that looks at a commits downstream. Clicking on a link also > >>> makes things easy for code archaeologists that might look into the issue > >>> months or years later (which might not even know how to find the report > >>> and potential discussions on lore from the syzbot report ID). > >> > >> No other system comes close to syzbot in terms of reporting meaningful > >> bugs, IMHO special casing it doesn't risk creep. > >> > >> Interestingly other bots attach links which are 100% pointless noise: > >> > >> Reported-by: Abaci Robot <abaci@linux.alibaba.com> > >> Link: https://bugzilla.openanolis.cn/show_bug.cgi?id=4174 > >> > >> Oh, eh. Let's see how noisy this check is once the merge window is over. > >> > >>> Hence, wouldn't it be better to ask the syzbot folks to change their > >>> reporting slightly and suggest something like this instead in their > >>> reports (the last line is the new one): > >>> > >>> ``` > >>> IMPORTANT: if you fix the issue, please add the following tag to the commit: > >>> Reported-by: syzbot+bba886ab504fcafecafe@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > >>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/cafecaca0cafecaca0cafecaca0@google.com/ > >>> ``` > >>> > >>> This might not be to hard if they known the message-id in advance. Maybe > >>> they could even use the syzbot report ID as msg-id to make things even > >>> easier. And for developers not much would change afaics, they just need > >>> to copy and paste two lines instead of one. > >> > >> Dmitry, WDYT? > > > > Adding a Link to syzbot reports should be relatively trivial. > > Sounds good. > > > Ted proposed to use Link _instead_ of Reported-by: > > https://github.com/google/syzkaller/issues/3596 > >> in fact, it might be nice if we could encourage upstream developers > >> put in the commit trailer: > >> Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=5266d464285a03cee9dbfda7d2452a72c3c2ae7c > >> in addition to, or better yet, instead of: > >> Reported-by: syzbot+15cd994e273307bf5cfa@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > > > > We could also use a link in the Reported-by tag, e.g.: > > > > Reported-by: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/b/5266d464285a03cee9db > > > > Some folks parse Reported-by to collect stats. > > > > What is better? > > Here are my thoughts: > > * we should definitely have a "Link:" to the report in lore, as that's > the long-term archive under our own control and also where discussions > happen after the report was posted; but I'm biased here, as such a tag > would make tracking with regzbot a no-brainer ;) > > * "Reported-by:" IMHO should stay for the hat tip and stats aspects; I > don't care if it includes the syzbot report ID or not (omitting it might > be good for the stats aspects and is more friendly to the eyes, but > those are just details) > > * a Link: to the syzkaller web ui might be nice, too -- and likely is > the easiest thing to look out for on the syzbot server side > > IOW something like this maybe: > > Reported-by: syzbot+cafecafecaca0cafecafe@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/cafecafecaca0cafecafe@google.com/ > Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/b/cafecafecaca0cafecafe > > Something like the following would look more normal, but of course is > only possible if syzbot starts out to look for such Link: tags (not sure > if the msgid is valid here, but you get the idea): > > Reported-by: syzbot@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > Link: > https://lore.kernel.org/r/syzbot+cafecafecaca0cafecafe-syzkaller-appspotmail-com@google.com/
Oh, you mean lore link.
We can parse out our hash from any tag, but the problem is that the current email api we use, does not allow to specify Message-ID before sending, so we don't know it when generating the text. We don't even know it after sending, the API is super simple: https://pkg.go.dev/google.golang.org/appengine/mail So we don't know what the lore link will be...
| |