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;
Date:   Thu, 19 Jan 2023 16:59:18 -0500
From:   Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
Cc:     sam@ravnborg.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        users@linux.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/15] backlight: omap1: Use backlight helpers
Message-ID: <20230119215918.3tv5e55a5sfcpf4v@meerkat.local>
References: <20230107-sam-video-backlight-drop-fb_blank-v1-0-1bd9bafb351f@ravnborg.org>
 <20230107-sam-video-backlight-drop-fb_blank-v1-13-1bd9bafb351f@ravnborg.org>
 <Y8m8CM35ku+Fuppc@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Y8m8CM35ku+Fuppc@google.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 09:54:16PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> My tools appear to dislike the line break in the Message-Id header.
> This isn't something I've encountered before.  Is this a B4 thing?

It's more like it's a Python thing. The upcoming version of b4 will avoid this
(by not relying on Python to do message generation).

> Is this standard?  Should I adapt my tooling to scan over line breaks?

This is RFC conformant, so if your tools are not able to deal with this
situation, you should consider modifying them.

-K