From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oa1-x34.google.com (mail-oa1-x34.google.com [IPv6:2001:4860:4864:20::34]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A60E3858C52 for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2023 19:10:00 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 0A60E3858C52 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-oa1-x34.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-17ab3a48158so35818793fac.1 for ; Tue, 04 Apr 2023 12:10:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1680635398; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=Eg1d9I5KDFdlbGd0W9recpaEC/k+oBk7mEBrWJ3ivoA=; b=oDbvwBkud4Agx3VlGQ3HZcthvhXD1tXXCCqB8nOCGT8IzeSqhk7UhXpavZJwLOD3Ep 65RYegNqZrOu9xwaZvLG+j+CEsGgpd6cdcc5TYfeR480ru769envim+/sjxcuU1sm56O u44ZxT3WiclIK4Ws+0vHy2VTMHWz9UfnRTERmlhbUuh3eageRWHJFwCHbOF2Cmte87+B NPt/2YQIJ29EdjvKCeKyj6MZtCqwWJRFJV+qaI8JyjPooYmx6g7TVkyTynHANh+VGC9E Rhtjg8tWeiqY9nI5pHkQLEy1I9YxinMDAg7vWb37FPQWroorwWmlaxDzKKBorW65M+8Q lITg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1680635398; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Eg1d9I5KDFdlbGd0W9recpaEC/k+oBk7mEBrWJ3ivoA=; b=NZoVJmxqTCvJZkxrSXcQtMPQXFwi3YLeQpruT4YexdCgHAA9gvq3o+XSrhrQS9kzIn PooW42316KIy0IEWjdoj4unwcwASA7aye3B4icOEMo8h0qRcjyE558RODSkHxWSjOhlp pu6ekQ1GUgIp6PoC2vRotFk5EOd3uAOYjTqzm/uA3P8Tr7s6DaDJ8MrF/KA9NdstiE8G WDBUtsi+/p1K4peeJo9AaNUuPeBDVIRSd9IaSNM/fB2AHdwVjCbO5ksFSiKjBjIWUErt iRKPZTFfZTajU07QKbv70N1SbctuHo+DND/u36ilX9EHORZ93OsIcpg4UQdG3hZToSyy eR8A== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9c2vvj5Nwn2saqDc9DSREcMotrbV09AOIxKgaWs6jUKQ3BFj24v cVBKY3dCGunkLum+u7KPZX/gyCRUQ5yevQLDLTkhbWuTk5w= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350a2P5OUX1aJKnjlJg2G6k7Tu3cb70vBYSNZg+36w6KFb2kMLPBxt6sD884r9zBERLjXiCtDC99oP+3ADEyBuJQ= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:3456:b0:17e:915c:84a2 with SMTP id i22-20020a056870345600b0017e915c84a2mr1808948oah.4.1680635398272; Tue, 04 Apr 2023 12:09:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <28fe1f1f-8fad-0da0-848e-a1d90d00cb42@redhat.com> <20230403203000.268748-1-bugaevc@gmail.com> <6521da3d-05a8-c758-29db-9948227bc2aa@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <6521da3d-05a8-c758-29db-9948227bc2aa@redhat.com> From: Sergey Bugaev Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2023 22:09:47 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Monday Patch Queue Review update (2023-04-03) To: "Carlos O'Donell" Cc: Samuel Thibault , libc-alpha@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,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 Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 8:48=E2=80=AFPM Carlos O'Donell = wrote: > Your patches: > > (a) Made it to the mailing list. > > (b) Made it into Patchwork (which we use for patch tracking) > > (c) Were reviewed as part of the weekly patch queue review. > > - We look over patches in the meeting to see if we can help > move them forward. > > (d) Did not get assigned any specific reviewer to review them. > > - This happens for any number of reasons e.g. lack of a person > who feels qualified to review a subsystem or machine, > lack of hardware to test, etc. Thanks for the explanation! > The outcome of the meeting was that we didn't find a way to help > move your patches forward, sorry for that. Ah, well, based on my previous experience, we just have to patiently wait for Samuel to find some time to review the patches :) > Your personal queue is here: > > https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/glibc/list/?submitter=3D35358 > > Please have look over the queue to see if some of those patches have > been committed or could have their state updated. Cool -- but I see that Patchwork gets confused by my somewhat liberal use of patch series formatting: * "[v2] hurd: Add expected abilist files for x86_64" supersedes "[RFC,34/34] hurd: Add expected abilist files for x86_64", so the latter should have State =3D Superseded, and the former State =3D RFC * The same goes for "[v2] hurd: Implement sigreturn for x86_64" and "[RFC,32/34] hurd: Implement sigreturn for x86_64" * Ditto for the "Alignment-respecting x86_64 trampoline.c" mini-series, which collectively supersedes "[RFC,18/34] hurd: Port trampoline.c to x86_64" (but it did grok that [PATCH v2 18.0/34] means a cover letter! unless that was done manually) Is there anything I should do differently when sending a replacement for a patch (but not a v2 of the whole series) to make it easier for Patchwork to understand what's going on? Sergey