On 10/9/24 14:50, Jeff Law wrote:
On 10/9/24 3:21 PM, Patrick O'Neill wrote:
On 10/9/24 14:07, Jeff Law wrote:
<snip>
Also note that if you use the tag "[RISC-V]" in your subject line
your patch will be automatically picked up by a pre-commit tester
that can be subsequently examined to verify behavior.
This patch's subject line looks good to me. It would've been picked
up as-is since it mentions riscv/risc-v.
The patch doesn't show up in patchworks so that's what stopped the
risc- v pre-commit from finding it.
Sadly I don't have much insight into what stopped patchworks from
seeing it. :-/
I'd assumed it wasn't [RISC-V], but you know that aspect better than I
:-)
That's a safe first guess :)
The flow for precommit gets new patches from the Patchworks API, so if
it isn't in patchworks then precommit won't see it.
We have patchworks to handle parsing emails/extracting patches for us :)
From poking around the patchworks source code my new best guess is that
the Content-Type header of the attachment in the original email threw it
off:
--00000000000079e1d00623f13532
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
name="0001-RISC-V-Enable-builtin-__riscv_mul-with-Zmmul-extensi.patch"
Seems like patchworks ignores all attachments that aren't `*/x-patch`,
`*/x-diff`, `text/*`?
https://github.com/getpatchwork/patchwork/blob/4dfe6991a7bcdb11fd878a087aba314e9fdaa2db/patchwork/parser.py#L686
https://github.com/getpatchwork/patchwork/blob/4dfe6991a7bcdb11fd878a087aba314e9fdaa2db/patchwork/parser.py#L639
Patrick
