RFC: Enable Sashiko code reviews for kexec at lists.infradead.org

[David Matlack]

On Wed, Sep 2, 2026 at 2:18 AM Pratyush Yadav <pratyush at kernel.org> wrote:
>
> +Cc Roman because I am complaining about Sashiko ;-)
>
> On Wed, Sep 02 2026, Baoquan He wrote:
>
> > On 09/02/26 at 11:04am, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> >> Hi Baoquan,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 02, 2026 at 01:52:51PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> >> > On 09/02/26 at 07:34am, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> >> > > On Tue, Sep 01, 2026 at 01:27:34PM -0700, David Matlack wrote:
> >> > > > Hi kexec@ mailing list and maintainers,
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I would like to enable Sashiko code reviews for patches sent to the
> >> > > > kexec mailing list. I have found it useful for patches I have sent and
> >> > > > reviewed on the kvm and linux-pci mailing lists, which have Sashiko
> >> > > > enabled.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I sent a pull request to Sashiko to add kexec here:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >   https://github.com/sashiko-dev/sashiko/pull/474
> >> > >
> >> > > diff --git a/sashiko.dev/email_policy.toml b/sashiko.dev/email_policy.toml
> >> > > index e6e4fb57f..e9ad97708 100644
> >> > > --- a/sashiko.dev/email_policy.toml
> >> > > +++ b/sashiko.dev/email_policy.toml
> >> > > @@ -175,6 +175,12 @@ reply_to_author = false
> >> > >  cc_individuals = false
> >> > >  cc = ["Chuck Lever <cel at kernel.org>", "Jeff Layton <jlayton at kernel.org>", "Anna Schumaker <anna at kernel.org>"]
> >> > >
> >> > > +[subsystems.kexec]
> >> > > +lists = ["kexec at lists.infradead.org"]
> >> > > +reply_to_author = true
> >> > > +send_positive_review = true
> >> > >
> >> > > Do we really want those?
> >> >
> >> > Some components don't want to CC list, then other people are welcome to
> >> > drop any comment during reviewing, while cc to maintainer and author
> >> > looks good to me. Just an input, no objection to any move.
> >>
> >> Sorry, I wasn't clear, I meant do we really want extra emails saying
> >> sashiko is happy?
> >
> > Oh, sorry. I misunderstood, I thought you had agreed to introduce
> > sashiko to part of list/author/maintainer or all.
> >
> > I think there are two different ways and they have different impact:
> >
> > 1) CC list (CC author and maintainer can be ignored beause all people
> > can see it)
>
> This is a side topic, but if we only Cc the list then Sashiko won't Cc
> the other people in the thread, like the usual "reply to all" every mail
> clients does. It will _only_ Cc the list. See [0] for example.
>
> I don't think that is a good idea, because Sashiko might complain about
> something, and then the patch author can reply to the complaint. People
> who are not subscribed to the list will neither see Sashiko's complaint
> nor the author's response. So they lose a useful part of the patch
> review process.
>
> I am one of those people. I don't subscribe to any mailing lists and
> instead use lei [1] to fetch them. I treat my inbox as the primary
> stream of patches, and then glance at the lists every now and then. If I
> get some patches in my inbox but then I don't get any of the follow-ups
> from the author to Sashiko, that's annoying. Sure, I might see them on
> the list later, but it is still annoying.
>
> And of course, there might be patches that touch multiple subsystems and
> maintainers of that subsystem might not subscribe to or track kexec@ at
> all. So they will entirely miss the conversation.
>
> If Sashiko is useful enough to send replies on the list, then I think it
> is useful enough to reply to everyone.

It looks like this can be configured:

 - reply_all=true will have Sashiko reply to everyone on the To/Cc line.
 - cc_individuals=true will have Sashiko include all inidividuals from the
   To/Cc line of the original patch.

>
> IIRC some people have complained in the past about automatically getting
> replies from Sashiko so maybe that is why this behaviour exists? Roman,
> is that correct? Is there any appetite yet to change that behaviour?
>
> Or could we perhaps have an unsubscribe mechanism where people who don't
> want to see anything from Sashiko can unsubscribe themselves and Sashiko
> will skip them when replying?
>
> [0] https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20260902072059.90ADC1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org/
> [1] https://public-inbox.org/lei.txt
>
> >   This equals to cc author and push other reviewers away. And no
> >   reviewers will be patient and curious enough to check the sashiko
> >   report except of maintainers. Because maintainers need pick patch
> >   and may check if all reported issues are handled;
> >
> > 2) Cc maintainers when patch is cooked
> >   Maintainers tell patch author to check the report. Maybe CC patch
> >   author directly can save maintainers' effort.
> >
> > I personally think 2) is good. About whether introducing sashiko,
> > I would vote yes. I buy token by myself, sashiko would be a plus.
>
> FWIW, Sashiko already tracks the kexec@ list and you can see all the
> patches in the web interface [2]. So you don't need to burn your tokens
> on reviewing kexec patches ;-)
>
> What David is proposing is to send those reviews to the list.
>
> [2] https://sashiko.dev/#/?list=org.infradead.lists.kexec
>
> >
> > Thanks
> > Baoquan
>
> --
> Regards,
> Pratyush Yadav