Received: by 2002:a5d:9c59:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 25csp1778105iof; Tue, 7 Jun 2022 11:14:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxU+hL7Di6dLyDdWjkoHNCRQh5fPkG6JvrLDJUp/4rAIeUTqrHHb9LX5QCwPFZaozdtPm/c X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:3b8a:b0:1e2:f1da:bf9b with SMTP id pc10-20020a17090b3b8a00b001e2f1dabf9bmr51785428pjb.77.1654625648423; Tue, 07 Jun 2022 11:14:08 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1654625648; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=p71PFYoRIBKM9GGO+AWuYE+bVZ9MFw//f7HSQQEKQHjrxEfki+MSLargka5qlkbUYL qpgtEthB7TO1U9UnePc7XP1DdPyiC/0OFCZqpizRwxVelBAveMH65SwPiBTZYL0KKD/k ZOYuqUB+IQtLwl9a/kkGI5Dk+b56fVKC5h6yHgyA+PmmGCX7IdJYlkSywn9kpLsvzAYD Ko6oWjbiRJrkEXLySpdxES0L03fQPdFegfhtEJ/Rv8ulpNggqFJ0CKY5ZXkql8Oer8cZ PPVMFnN6bc/eEx+GBdJ7OI84d36LiSjkW6d2RN/yvezFbq4+2DBq5Q26+9vW+3Ev7mFl xzDA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:references:cc:to :subject; bh=KwZZ2xnkHqVnDyBPc1BlYaPJMFc0g6hNxRYFN0ARct4=; b=m8UDz+sGHXBlfhLvr7I5NkVd0ttZg2xgrut24iGVZ8dHjn6R3iK7fq5NTEZfO/X9xG ffNLGLEl2P2Tabw04uC4lJUemYF1nbYIcB1DNARzeAoq//Uf9VaOUO1lVFxU1sTmw7i4 mUqzIy2Tah5Yod6jxeYROuqbWoystmSP2+r79jEwf2d7ZCdfCHwMfYDwuj8Sk7oorMV6 EXLba9dTX5FjcaIt49qNtW8Oa2lIVfcattt5aFHK4fY0j+PKevdsUGe44uOosi6WecVf nxvrseJOafDClX7FxeE52IT+c7/lJIzgKEcaXm4BPfM2GE+8YNfUQV2x6KbiKLjrr06m VCfA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=QUARANTINE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=huawei.com Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id y36-20020a056a001ca400b0051babb88d79si22507245pfw.277.2022.06.07.11.13.52; Tue, 07 Jun 2022 11:14:08 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=QUARANTINE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=huawei.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236203AbiFGDKi (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 6 Jun 2022 23:10:38 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36218 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229470AbiFGDKd (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jun 2022 23:10:33 -0400 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com (szxga02-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.188]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BB55B0D26; Mon, 6 Jun 2022 20:10:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dggemv704-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.56]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4LHFdf2GRkzRhpp; Tue, 7 Jun 2022 11:07:18 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemm600009.china.huawei.com (7.193.23.164) by dggemv704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.47) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Tue, 7 Jun 2022 11:10:29 +0800 Received: from [10.174.176.73] (10.174.176.73) by kwepemm600009.china.huawei.com (7.193.23.164) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Tue, 7 Jun 2022 11:10:28 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v5 0/3] support concurrent sync io for bfq on a specail occasion To: Jan Kara CC: , , , , , , Jens Axboe References: <20220428120837.3737765-1-yukuai3@huawei.com> <61b67d5e-829c-8130-7bda-81615d654829@huawei.com> <81411289-e13c-20f5-df63-c059babca57a@huawei.com> <55919e29-1f22-e8aa-f3d2-08c57d9e1c22@huawei.com> <20220523085902.wmxoebyq3crerecr@quack3.lan> <25f6703e-9e10-75d9-a893-6df1e6b75254@kernel.dk> <20220523152516.7sr247i3bzwhr44w@quack3.lan> From: Yu Kuai Message-ID: <21cd1c49-838a-7f03-ab13-9a4f2ac65979@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2022 11:10:27 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20220523152516.7sr247i3bzwhr44w@quack3.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gbk"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.174.176.73] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems701-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.178) To kwepemm600009.china.huawei.com (7.193.23.164) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org ?? 2022/05/23 23:25, Jan Kara ะด??: > On Mon 23-05-22 06:36:58, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 5/23/22 2:59 AM, Jan Kara wrote: >>> On Mon 23-05-22 09:10:38, yukuai (C) wrote: >>>> ? 2022/05/21 20:21, Jens Axboe ??: >>>>> On 5/21/22 1:22 AM, yukuai (C) wrote: >>>>>> ? 2022/05/14 17:29, yukuai (C) ??: >>>>>>> ? 2022/05/05 9:00, yukuai (C) ??: >>>>>>>> Hi, Paolo >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Can you take a look at this patchset? It has been quite a long time >>>>>>>> since we spotted this problem... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> friendly ping ... >>>>>> friendly ping ... >>>>> >>>>> I can't speak for Paolo, but I've mentioned before that the majority >>>>> of your messages end up in my spam. That's still the case, in fact >>>>> I just marked maybe 10 of them as not spam. >>>>> >>>>> You really need to get this issued sorted out, or you will continue >>>>> to have patches ignore because folks may simply not see them. >>>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Thanks for your notice. >>>> >>>> Is it just me or do you see someone else's messages from *huawei.com >>>> end up in spam? I tried to seek help from our IT support, however, they >>>> didn't find anything unusual... >>> >>> So actually I have noticed that a lot of (valid) email from huawei.com (not >>> just you) ends up in the spam mailbox. For me direct messages usually pass >>> (likely matching SPF records for originating mail server save the email >>> from going to spam) but messages going through mailing lists are flagged as >>> spam because the emails are missing valid DKIM signature but huawei.com >>> DMARC config says there should be DKIM signature (even direct messages are >>> missing DKIM so this does not seem as a mailing list configuration issue). >>> So this seems as some misconfiguration of the mails on huawei.com side >>> (likely missing DKIM signing of outgoing email). >> >> SPF/DKIM was indeed a problem earlier for yukaui patches, but I don't >> see that anymore. Maybe it's still an issue for some emails, from them >> or Huawei in general? > > Hum, for me all emails from Huawei I've received even today fail the DKIM > check. After some more digging there is interesting inconsistency in DMARC > configuration for huawei.com domain. There is DMARC record for huawei.com > like: > > huawei.com. 600 IN TXT "v=DMARC1;p=none;rua=mailto:dmarc@edm.huawei.com" > > which means no DKIM is required but _dmarc.huawei.com has: > > _dmarc.huawei.com. 600 IN TXT "v=DMARC1;p=quarantine;ruf=mailto:dmarc@huawei.com;rua=mailto:dmarc@huawei.com" > > which says that DKIM is required. I guess this inconsistency may be the > reason why there are problems with DKIM validation for senders from > huawei.com. Yu Kuai, can you perhaps take this to your IT support to fix > this? Either make sure huawei.com emails get properly signed with DKIM or > remove the 'quarantine' record from _dmarc.huawei.com. Thanks! > > Honza > Hi, Jan and Jens I just got response from our IT support: 'fo' is not set in our dmarc configuration(default is 0), which means SPF and DKIM verify both failed so that emails will end up in spam. It right that DKIM verify is failed because there is no signed key, however, our IT support are curious how SPF verify faild. Can you guys please take a look at ip address of sender? So our IT support can take a look if they miss it from SPF records. Thanks, Kuai