From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [96.47.72.81]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F001F3858D1E for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 16:51:47 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org F001F3858D1E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=FreeBSD.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [96.47.72.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client CN "mx1.freebsd.org", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4MzT8z3rCRz45Cf; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 16:51:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [96.47.72.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4MzT8z339pz3yBc; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 16:51:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1666975907; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=F4dzUXEZCRs13/ySW3DYUcDF3CAjmyHQp4wJYIj/514=; b=AttWiKZhvWKRiJQ6+wEn9VqPEMoZIJFblUXJ7VgR4hVcIlj+8iHVNlEZ4//uUPx/yFIt5S a6jZ3i9MziScZtRMxJyWCXxuD4kquIqQ6/Qp6A4Av/yVYxqtuUyp0imRpobEZamsuVP2FK 77lyathwi+LqgbXlb3EodMqpPmGni3yD2u/Qj8q9rYNcBRy8psE2MFFmfr14O6jie6u9Dz UNmNsW+PzERregzYdtt4kUc11PXwm0G/5Gk/ctXcwo4Xo+Z+EbxKQ9NimIaBYyCDSRCFYc k9y7y+Tc/isPFbuQt9vNDaRKH+TaNKOCg/8YK9kg0OnnfuB0CGNAqh/Ohad6xQ== Received: from [10.0.1.4] (ralph.baldwin.cx [66.234.199.215]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: jhb) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4MzT8y5YHSz1JdB; Fri, 28 Oct 2022 16:51:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 09:51:45 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.3.1 Content-Language: en-US To: Simon Marchi , Luis Machado , "gdb@sourceware.org" Cc: Mark Wielaard References: <83485199-965e-7ff5-1dc8-d027b74b56f7@arm.com> From: John Baldwin Subject: Re: Any concrete plans after the GDB BoF? In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1666975907; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=F4dzUXEZCRs13/ySW3DYUcDF3CAjmyHQp4wJYIj/514=; b=aUJoEHviZ9RDDoJKmSOWbPh7VKCm+OQh8yhqN05rImWRhYMyKlnS1vZk+LKc/PV7XsZII+ UyGcP827kd44sOsLRWkOjKDSDgNk4oQGDBcrXA4bpdd84EEjT2SRT9Hc4clab+R7yk/BuC DLmehi4H3gXEMYweURZ7l+1ST9GHfbF0EuL6/FUGV7Ckp4+brbu3zF/mjbdV+vl0+U+d1+ t18PK7453XCRPruOBhEu9VN1BLNuQsUz7Iq7oxM5BoBuWftCoclST62fn+WC9qifBHIpGG AEatSMUFyuVYYZ8/OzEpMtt4ZXHuoF7nz2zoxbHMyDRxmTqnmYF/IyOqeZ55cQ== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=dkim; d=freebsd.org; t=1666975907; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Qx3oCWwU8OQxctFMrsXCJCEHahrg9pgMMrEe/f8Rr3lH67PuHRhHpZO+GfQ5xfe2sCpeYG aIV6M0FB3Q75XUk1hndyKcAW7bYfGMxq4YCQn1HOJywXNJxm+K5y1KpeMwadyU0fGXlEhV 8TkkNFcUOUlpWz6AUvi8rUfIiDlOz9DW9yQR1Mw1fG0rfUg9rrh8tytTT+gqVB0V7sPTdg Ub4oDVuJWfZL4W5sQVE/uF4y0PIB6G5s8gS6J7BpqCizBu2RjMIaNOUaUaqeIWYlmCesyI BD2fSJeFAPhsZf9H1KRN4su9xoBAwUZM0s1yAvG80+FwzE2fMf2zgUIqkoCWGQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 10/28/22 9:16 AM, Simon Marchi via Gdb wrote: > On 2022-10-27 06 h 47, Luis Machado via Gdb wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Having suggested a few topics for the GDB BoF (I noticed they were discussed, to some extent), are there >> any concrete plans from the GDB global maintainers (leadership? I don't know how to call it) to address >> some of those concerns? >> >> Simon was kind enough to cleanup the patchworks instance, though that is not yet fully integrated into >> something we can easily use to do tests/CI. I see the number of unreviewed patches is growing again. >> >> For example, it is not easy to pick a patch to review. You need to locate the entry in your inbox so you >> can reply to it. > > I do not know of a way to trigger CI tests from Patchwork, that would > perhaps be a question for Mark (added in CC). > > On a personal note, coming back from the Cauldron, I set myself a goal > to do more reviews as part of my daily work. I'm trying to do around 1 > hour a day of upstream reviews, and to choose what to review, I use > patchwork, sorting patches by oldest date. I check if the patch I'm > looking at has already been reviewed, merged, or superseded by a new > version, and if so I update its status. Rinse and repeat until I find a > patch that needs reviewing. Otherwise, just looking at my inbox's > gdb-patches folder with thousands of unread messages, I don't know what > to start with. Just by myself, I certainly won't get through the whole > list of patches pending review, but I think it is a somewhat fair > algorithm. So in that regard, patchwork is useful for me. Interesting. Does the date factor in pings? That is, if you ping a series does it move earlier in the list or does it keep its original date? Actually, I guess not all pings work. I have a series I posted back on July 7th and have pinged a few times since that doesn't show up in patchworks. (And I only confirmed that by finding some other closed patch with my username so I could do a query by username.) Maybe because the pings were all replies that had 'Re:' prefixes in the subject? If we need to format pings in a certain way, that would be good to know. Alternatively, if old patch series just need to be re-posted that would also be good to know. The web UI for patchworks also seems a bit buggy. Not sure who to provide feedback to? Trying to do a text search on a series name (e.g. putting a keyword in the series name field) just ignores the text field and returns all patches. Also, if you click on a different field like Submitter and then try to go to another page, it resets the sort order on the second page to sort by Date. If you then change the sorting key on the second page, it reverts back to the first page with the new key. I haven't tried manually constructing the parameters in the URL to get to the second page with a new key. -- John Baldwin