Hi Stephen,
Many thanks for your feedback.
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 03:17:39PM +0100, Stephen Finucane wrote:
On Tue, 2019-06-18 at 13:47 +0200, Eugeniu Rosca wrote:
Jeremy, Stephen, cc: Tom
FYI, another patchwork glitch is apparently showing up in https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1117783/ , where none of the messages visible in https://marc.info/?t=156078655700002&r=1&w=4 is being rendered.
Looking at [1], it seems this is base64 encoded.
Is this concluded from the non-ASCII format of the mbox file returned by https://marc.info? FWIW, my other U-Boot contributions look similar: https://marc.info/?l=u-boot&m=155862561809782&q=mbox https://marc.info/?l=u-boot&m=155680022731874&q=mbox
Nevertheless, patchwork didn't experience issues displaying the subsequent replies in those threads.
Did you send this with 'git-send-email' and, if so, did you do anything funky?
I did use 'git' to submit all the above patches passing the usual parameters: `git send-email --to A --to B --cc C my.patch`.
FWIW, u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de replied below to [1]:
-------8<------------ Your message to U-Boot awaits moderator approval Your mail to 'U-Boot' with the subject [PATCH] pinctrl: renesas: Synchronize Gen2/Gen3 tables with Linux 5.2-rc5
Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval. The reason it is being held: Message body is too big: 192878 bytes with a limit of 100 KB Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive notification of the moderator's decision. If you would like to cancel this posting, please visit the following URL: -------8<------------
Replicating the chronology of the issue, do you think it could be related to 1) the patch size or to 2) the moderator's approval event?
+--------------+ |1. Patch sent | +------+-------+ | +------v----------------------------------------+ |2. U-Boot reports awaiting moderator's approval| | (the patch does not show up in patchwork) | +------+----------------------------------------+ | +------v-------------------------------+ |3. Reply A (not rendered by patchwork)| +------+-------------------------------+ | +------v-------------------------------+ |4. Reply B (not rendered by patchwork)| +------+-------------------------------+ | +------v-----------------------------+ |5. Patch approved by moderator | | (the patch shows up in patchwork)| +------+-----------------------------+ | +------v---------------------------+ |6. Reply C (rendered by patchwork)| +------+---------------------------+ | +------v---------------------------+ |7. Reply D (rendered by patchwork)| +----------------------------------+
I guess we could attempt to decode these, though that's arguably a new feature so I'm not sure if we could backport it to 'stable/2.1'. In any case, could you provide an mbox replete with all the headers so I can see if there are any heuristics we can use to identify these emails?
Do you mean https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1117783/mbox/ ?
Stephen
Thanks again!