On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 2:31 PM, Daniel Axtens <d...@axtens.net> wrote:
> Dmitry Vyukov <dvyu...@google.com> writes:
>> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 9:26 AM, Paolo Abeni <pab...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2018-02-21 at 16:47 -0500, David Miller wrote:
>>>> I have to mention this now before it gets out of control.
>>>> I would like to ask that syzkaller stop posting the patch it is
>>>> testing when it posts to netdev.
>>> There is an open issue on this topic:
>>> https://github.com/google/syzkaller/issues/526
>>> The current behaviour is that syzbot replies to all get_maintainer.pl
>>> recipients after testing a patch, regardless of the test submission
>>> recipient list, the idea was instead to respect such list.
>> Hi David, Florian, Paolo,
>> Didn't realize it triggers patchwork. This wasn't intentional, sorry.
> A little-publicised and incorrectly-documented(!) feature of Patchwork
> is that it supports some email headers. In particular, if you include an
> "X-Patchwork-Hint: ignore" header, the mail will not be parsed by
> Patchwork.
> This will stop it being recorded as a patch. Unfortunately it will also
> stop it being recorded as a comment - I don't know if that's an issue in
> this case. Maybe we can set you up with Patchwork 2's new checks
> infrastructure instead.

Nice. But unfortunately the current mailing technology we use allows
very limited set of headers and no custom headers:
So while possible, it would require very significant rework...

What's the Patchwork 2's new checks infrastructure?
If it will still remain a problem (hopefully not), then maybe it's
possible to blacklist syzbot address from creating new patches. syzbot
can do a lot, but so far does not also generate fixes for the bugs it
discovers :)

Reply via email to