Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 14 Apr 2021 16:44:43 +0000
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
From:   w4v3 <vv4v3@protonmail.com>
Cc:     Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info>,
        "corbet@lwn.net" <corbet@lwn.net>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>
Reply-To: w4v3 <vv4v3@protonmail.com>
Subject: Re: "Reporting issues" document feedback
Message-ID: <3x-mW2Aa7Iz_sCWB1nxpPelpI18fDYosCWTq0_3mkcpnkNC6-HTsmIZ9eCEqcSKzXvt7-F25btwz38vkxAQBRLRVsgUqxUZlU9a-ZR_XhMY=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0hX2StQVttAciHYH-urUH+Hi92z9z2ZbcNgQPt0E2Jpwg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <vaWPnw1Txo_MD5Sf-BnMmq3pBTkITza0W5p_jAi8JIy3hBAbCsKPXZ5g5IHKYGqK6zLjzUNgJ59xMCHvhREBUq6Vc1105b8yCIVDgaPABqE=@protonmail.com> <dff6badf-58f5-98c8-871c-94d901ac6919@leemhuis.info> <wqM80O49houE3ZJHpxjcrNxijZ_h9pMjxZU2OCL-ZpsdwMhIVFcGXZb9qe93r2AY0qd0dB-94ZVQaF-Xb-i-zqX5DIO5S4C6UTBpVkxvszA=@protonmail.com> <CAJZ5v0hX2StQVttAciHYH-urUH+Hi92z9z2ZbcNgQPt0E2Jpwg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Alright, thanks for clarifying!


Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.

=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 Original Me=
ssage =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90
On Wednesday, April 14, 2021 3:42 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org>=
 wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:22 PM w4v3 vv4v3@protonmail.com wrote:
>
> > Hi Thorsten,
> > Thanks for the quick and illuminating response :)
> >
> > > Links to your bug report and the thread on the mailing list would hav=
e
> > > helped here to understand better what's going on, but whatever, they =
are
> > > not that important.
> >
> > Here you go: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D212643
> > https://marc.info/?l=3Dlinux-acpi&m=3D161824910030600&w=3D2
> >
> > > But it should, otherwise the subsystem should remove the line startin=
g
> > > with B: ("bugs:" in the webview).
> > > Rafael might be able to clarify things.
> >
> > > But afais it's appropriate there is a B: line: just a few weeks ago I
> > > took a quick look at bugzilla and ACPI bugs in particular, and back t=
hen
> > > most of the bug reports there got handled by the maintainers. That's =
why
> > > I assume you were just unlucky and your report fall through the crack=
s
> > > (but obviously I might be wrong here). And maybe your report even did
> > > help: the developer that fixed the issue might have seen both the bug
> > > entry and the mailed report, but simply forget to close the former.
> >
> > Good to know. It does seem like many recent ACPI bug reports on bugzill=
a
> > have been processed by maintainers. Maybe it is the ACPI-subcomponent I
> > chose for the bug: in Config-Tables, only two other bugs were submitted
> > and they did not attract comments. Anyways, I understand now that it's
> > not an issue with the document so thanks for forwarding it to Rafael.
>
> As a rule, ACPI bugs submitted through the BZ are processed by the
> ACPI team (not necessarily by me in person, though), but the response
> time may vary, so it's better to report urgent issues by sending
> e-mail to linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org.
>
> Definitely issues where table dumps or similar are requested are best
> handled in the BZ, so reporters can be asked to create a BZ entry for
> a bug reported by e-mail anyway.
>
> If you are interested in the history (ie. what issues were reported in
> the past), you need to look at both the BZ and the ml record.
>
> HTH