Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20191001173728.149786-1-brianvv@google.com> <20191001173728.149786-3-brianvv@google.com>
 <CAEf4BzYxs6Ace8s64ML3pA9H4y0vgdWv_vDF57oy3i-O_G7c-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABCgpaWbPN+2vSNdynHtmDxrgGbyzHa_D-y4-X8hLrQYbhTx=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191002085553.GA6226@pc-66.home> <CAEf4BzZAywR2g4bRu8Bs-YJxzf64GTrR7NvgOaXG2fqaKiJpSQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191002215051.GB9196@pc-66.home>
In-Reply-To: <20191002215051.GB9196@pc-66.home>
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 2 Oct 2019 14:53:47 -0700
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzaftLAc1xv5yiRE2J6MLy_FF4g6_dqExTiPjs6ZDX6e=w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf 2/2] selftests/bpf: test_progs: don't leak server_fd
 in test_sockopt_inherit
To:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc:     Brian Vazquez <brianvv.kernel@gmail.com>,
        Brian Vazquez <brianvv@google.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 2:51 PM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 01:30:14PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 1:56 AM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 08:42:30PM -0700, Brian Vazquez wrote:
> > > > Thanks for reviewing the patches Andrii!
> > > >
> > > > Although Daniel fixed them and applied them correctly.
> > >
> > > After last kernel/maintainer summit at LPC, I reworked all my patchwork scripts [0]
> > > which I use for bpf trees in order to further reduce manual work and add more sanity
> > > checks at the same time. Therefore, the broken Fixes: tag was a good test-case. ;-)
> >
> > Do you scripts also capitalize first word after libbpf: prefix? Is
> > that intentional? Is that a recommended subject casing:
> >
> > "libbpf: Do awesome stuff" vs "libbpf: do awesome stuff"?
>
> Right now we have a bit of a mix on that regard, and basically what the
> pw-apply script from [0] is doing, is the following to provide some more
> context:
>
> - Pulls the series mbox specified by series id from patchwork, dumps all
>   necessary information about the series, e.g. whether it's complete and
>   all patches are present, etc.
> - Pushes the mbox through mb2q which is a script that x86 maintainers and
>   few others use for their patch management and spills out a new mbox.
>   This is effectively 'normalizing' the patches from the mbox to bring in
>   some more consistency, meaning it adds Link: tags to every patch based
>   on the message id and checks whether the necessary mailing list aka
>   bpf was in Cc, so we always have lore BPF archive links, sorts tags so
>   they all have a consistent order, it allows to propagate Acked-by,
>   Reviewed-by, Tested-by tags from cover letter into the individual
>   patches, it also capitalizes the first word after the subsystem prefix.
> - It applies and merges the resulting mbox, and performs additional checks
>   for the newly added commit range, that is, it checks whether Fixes tags
>   are correctly formatted, whether the commit exists at all in the tree or
>   whether subject / sha is wrong, and throws warnings to me so I can fix
>   them up if needed or toss out the series again worst case, as well as
>   checks whether SOB from the patch authors is present and matches their
>   name.
> - It allows to set the patches from the series into accepted state in
>   patchwork.
>
> So overall less manual work / checks than what used to be before while
> improving / ensuring more consistency in the commits at the same time.
> If you have further suggestions / improvements / patches to pw.git,
> happy to hear. :)
>

"libbpf: Captilized subj" looks weird, but I can live with that. I'll
post subsequent patches with that casing. I'm glad a lot of that stuff
is semi-automated, it's terrible to have to always check all that
manually :)

> Thanks,
> Daniel
>
> > >   [0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dborkman/pw.git/
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 8:20 PM Andrii Nakryiko
> > > > <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 10:40 AM Brian Vazquez <brianvv@google.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think there is a need to add "test_progs:" to subject, "
> > > > > test_sockopt_inherit" is specific enough ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > > server_fd needs to be close if pthread can't be created.
> > > > >
> > > > > typo: closed
> > > > >
> > > > > > Fixes: e3e02e1d9c24 ("selftests/bpf: test_progs: convert test_sockopt_inherit")
> > > > > > Cc: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Brian Vazquez <brianvv@google.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > > Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > >  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockopt_inherit.c | 2 +-
> > > > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)