On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:08:01 +0800 Hillf Danton <hdan...@sina.com> wrote:
> Hey Stefano > > On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 18:02:48 +0800 Stefano Brivio wrote: > > > > --- > > This patch was sent to d...@openvswitch.org and appeared on netdev > > only as Pravin replied to it, giving his Acked-by. I contacted the > > Correct. I am unable to find the patches I sent to lkml on > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/. > > > original author one month ago requesting to resend this to netdev, > > but didn't get an answer, so I'm now resending the original patch. > > > Nor patches to <x...@vger.kernel.org>. > Say sorry to you for missing in action. > I sent a mail to <postmas...@vger.kernel.org> sometime ago asking for > how to cure the pain, without a message echoed since. > That is my poor defend. Ouch, and also this reply didn't reach netdev. Looking at headers: Received: from r3-20.sinamail.sina.com.cn (r3-20.sinamail.sina.com.cn [202.108.3.20]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 9868983F45 for <sbri...@redhat.com>; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 11:08:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain)([222.131.66.83]) by sina.com with ESMTP id 5DAD919A000082B3; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:08:12 +0800 (CST) it's not in DNSRBL or anything, and looks similar enough to e.g.: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10663003/ that was received without issues by majord...@vger.kernel.org. The only relevant difference seems to be the missing HELO from r3-20.sinamail.sina.com.cn, I have no idea why that would be omitted. Headers added by MTA delivering this to me: X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, ACL 264 matched, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.27]); Mon, 21 Oct 2019 11:08:19 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: inspected by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.27]); Mon, 21 Oct 2019 11:08:19 +0000 (UTC) for IP:'202.108.3.20' DOMAIN:'r3-20.sinamail.sina.com.cn' HELO:'r3-20.sinamail.sina.com.cn' FROM:'hdan...@sina.com' RCPT:'' X-RedHat-Spam-Score: 0.001 (FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS) 202.108.3.20 r3-20.sinamail.sina.com.cn 202.108.3.20 r3-20.sinamail.sina.com.cn <hdan...@sina.com> it even passes SPF. But maybe the missing HELO is a problem for SPF on vger.kernel.org? Checked against http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-taboos.txt, also no matches. Sorry, I don't have any suggestions other than contacting postmas...@vger.kernel.org again -- perhaps from a different address. > > net/openvswitch/vport-internal_dev.c | 11 ++++------- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > And feel free to pick up the diff if they make sense, as you see, > they were sent usually without the Signed-off-by tag. I think this submission should be fine, I added you as From: and kept your original Signed-off-by -- thanks for fixing this by the way! -- Stefano _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
