From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8591A106A for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 10:34:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 12 Dec 2016 01:34:06 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,334,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="39174579" Received: from fmsmsx108.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.206]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 12 Dec 2016 01:34:06 -0800 Received: from shsmsx151.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.50) by FMSMSX108.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.206) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 01:34:05 -0800 Received: from shsmsx103.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.4.11]) by SHSMSX151.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.77]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Mon, 12 Dec 2016 17:34:02 +0800 From: "Wei, FangfangX" To: Thomas Monjalon , "Mcnamara, John" CC: "ci@dpdk.org" , "Xu, Qian Q" , "Liu, Yong" , "Chen, WeichunX" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-ci] [PATCH v4 7/7] tests: add checkpatch Thread-Index: AQHSTvs6nSM4jn92akWd6gn3UCZF/6D6ch+A//+iiACAAeZw8P//uoEAgAHfJPD///BIgAA0CAbQ//+wh4D/+v1RYP/1vF9g Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 09:34:02 +0000 Message-ID: <067B569323FEB248B5CB480E1954F4346E9CB299@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1480599892-14190-1-git-send-email-thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> <1774642.W6cV4eEDuB@xps13> <067B569323FEB248B5CB480E1954F4346BEA6160@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> <5527892.MAichyp85O@xps13> <067B569323FEB248B5CB480E1954F4346E9CB280@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <067B569323FEB248B5CB480E1954F4346E9CB280@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiZjcwOWRhMjMtYWRmZC00MjZhLWIyMWEtNzRjZWQ2MTU0ODQ3IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE1LjkuNi42IiwiVHJ1c3RlZExhYmVsSGFzaCI6InNoK1JzWG95KzNGTFZmeGZXNTZ6S2w1b3BadGNDNm5lV0l3eDNxZU4yNEk9In0= x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [PATCH v4 7/7] tests: add checkpatch X-BeenThere: ci@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK CI discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 09:34:08 -0000 Hi Thomas, >>Yes it just an email to test-report@dpdk.org. Then this email is automati= cally parsed and integrated in patchwork by update-pw.sh running on the ser= ver. >>That's how the checkpatch test works (see tests/checkpatch.sh). >If I send email with my own script, the receiver is test-report@dpdk.org, = and the report format shows as below. Is this email also automatically pars= ed and integrated in patchwork on the server? >Test-Label: Intel Per-patch compilation check >Test-Status: SUCCESS >http://dpdk.org/patch/17859 >_Compilation OK_ >The content about this compilation It works now! Please refer to http://dpdk.org/patch/17860 Thomas, thanks for your kindly help! John, thanks for your help about pwclient! Any comments please contacts me, thanks! Best Regards Fangfang Wei -----Original Message----- From: ci [mailto:ci-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Wei, FangfangX Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 5:27 PM To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: ci@dpdk.org; Xu, Qian Q ; Liu, Yong ; Chen, WeichunX Subject: Re: [dpdk-ci] [PATCH v4 7/7] tests: add checkpatch 2016-12-09 08:51, Wei, FangfangX: >> My internet connection is working fine, and also configure http_proxy an= d https_proxy, but the connection is still timeout. >>=20 >> I think that's because the rpc client can't connect to your rpc server. = Is there any other configuration should be configured? >I've found it is an open issue. pwclient does not work with proxy: > https://github.com/getpatchwork/patchwork/issues/47 With John's patch, pwclient is working via intel firewall now. Thanks, John! >> According to my understanding, the "pwid=3D$($pwclient list -f '%{id}' -= m "$msgid " in the script "send-patch-report.sh" is just trying to get the = patchwork id, is that right? >Yes, if you already have to patchwork id, you can put it. >It makes me think that the patchwork id should be an option of this script= . I think adding patchwork id as an option of this script is a good idea. Because in my per-patch build report, the patchwork id is known. There's no= necessary to get it through patchwork with message id. >> Then I just define pwid=3D"17772" in "send-patch-report.sh" directly, ru= n the script again, nothing happened. The email hasn't been sent to test-re= port@dpdk.org. >Are you sure "sendmail -t" is working fine in your environment? Actually, I'm not sure about it. In your environment, is there any configur= ation about sendmail in Linux? >> I think the function about send-patch-report.sh is just to send patch re= port to test-report@dpdk.org. It can't generate the following content in pa= tchwork as checkpatch. Am I right? >Yes it just an email to test-report@dpdk.org. Then this email is automatic= ally parsed and integrated in patchwork by update-pw.sh running on the serv= er. >That's how the checkpatch test works (see tests/checkpatch.sh). If I send email with my own script, the receiver is test-report@dpdk.org, a= nd the report format shows as below. Is this email also automatically parse= d and integrated in patchwork on the server? Test-Label: Intel Per-patch compilation check Test-Status: SUCCESS http://dpdk.org/patch/17859 _Compilation OK_ The content about this compilation Best Regards Fangfang Wei