Hey Fengguang, On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 07:29:50AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > Good point! I noticed it too while sending out the report. It'll be > showed as this in future: > > > https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Borislav-Petkov/x86-Optimize-clear_page/20170210-053052
How about pointing to the patch directly? https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/0ad07c8104eb5c12dfcb86581c1cc657183496cc > Sorry the 2nd report was send out manually and I only checked the > emails in my _current_ mbox. Since the previous report email has been > archived, it slipped through the duplication check. No worries - this was all a prelude to me hinting at the email-based talking to the bot :-) > CC Xiaolong. It's possible to automate the test-of-fixup-patches. > Firstly find out the original email report by the Message-ID being > replied to. Then fetch all the information required for deciding where > the patch should be applied to, parameters to auto-testing the patch. Sounds like a plan. It would probably even be easier for the bot if the reply-mail contained specially-formatted hints like: TEST-WITH-BELOW-PATCH: ... or so. Btw, another nice aspect of this talking back to the bot is that before I, as a recipient of the bug report, go and try to prepare a guest or find a machine to reproduce properly, I can send a quick diff to the bot in the meantime and say, "try this on the guest. I have a hunch it might fix it." > Yeah we have a TODO to do email based on-demand service, which looks > close to your proposal. Cool. Ping me if you need testers. Thanks! -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) --
