linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] scripts/move_maintainer

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 08 Aug 2017 17:37:50 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] scripts/move_maintainer_sections.bash

On Tue, 2017-08-08 at 11:33 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2017-08-05 at 18:45 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > Move MAINTAINERS into a separate directory and reorder it.
> > > Separate various blocks of MAINTAINER sections into separate files.
> > 
> > Hey Linus.
> > 
> > If/when you try this out, do please let me know what
> > you think.
> 
> Ok, I've applied the preparatory patches, but not run the script.
> 
> Or rather, I ran the script to see what happens, but I'm not going to
> push the end result.
> 
> From a quick look at the end result, I note:
> 
>  - the arch maintainer split is pointless. It ends up being just one
> entry per architecture

I think that's just preliminary.

Many of the arches have a single maintainer and many
of the drivers specific to that arch could/should be
moved into the arch_<foo> file.

But that doesn't seem easily scriptable.

> for x86_64 not even that (because the x86> pattern matched all of
> them)

What x86_64 section is that?  There isn't an arch/x86_64
directory and only 1 combined entry for x86 and x86_64.

>  - the two arch maintainer lists that end up being bigger is x86 and
> arm, but the x86 one picked up a log of misleading ones (not just PCI:
> EFI, various random other things too)

Yeah, it's imperfect.  Suggestions welcomed.

>  - they all end up having the empty line at the top because of how the
> parse-maintainers.pl script works.

That's because I was a bit lazy about the output.
	awk '{ if (NR > 1) { print; } }'
would fix it.

Also a 00-README type file for the introductory section
could be useful.

> But *some* of it looks really nice.
> 
> The other thing I note is that the way the patches look, this is going
> to be a disaster to merge with any other work - and there really tends
> to be a lot of things touching MAINTAINERS.

It is going to be messy.
Once done it should be easier though.

Even today there's a merge conflict (kinda) with -next and
the alphabetic
reordering movement as one of the sections
is duplicated again. (SYNC
FILE FRAMEWORK)

Collecting the remainder MAINTAINERS patches after an -rc1
and applying them with a quilt like merge might help too
if Andrew feels up to it.

> I'll have to think about it.
> 
> But at least the infrastructure patches are applied,

Thanks.