linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] 9p updates for 4.19

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

Date:   Fri, 17 Aug 2018 23:36:48 +0200
From:   Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     V9FS Developers <v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] 9p updates for 4.19

Linus Torvalds wrote on Fri, Aug 17, 2018:
> So this pull request confuses me, and that's not a good thing.

I'll hopefully do better next time! Thank you for taking the time to
explain.

> On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 7:33 PM Dominique Martinet
> <asmadeus@...ewreck.org> wrote:
> >
> > Pull request for inclusion in 4.19 for 9p
> 
> So when I pull the tag, I get a different message, talking about
> 
>   This tag is the same as 9p-for-4.19 without the two MAINTAINERS patches
> 
> but I never saw a first version.

I thought the the same thing (that you never saw the first version) when
I wrote the request-pull email and adjusted the text -- I wasn't aware
the tag should have the same text as the mail but will pay attention to
that in the future, it does make sense.

For the background, I had used 9p-for-4.19 in a mail to v9fs-developer
asking for testing earlier this week, it is still in the repo as another
signed tag if you'd like to confirm.
I removed the "MAINTAINERS patches" when Andrew picked them up shortly
after the original mail and made the second tag back then.

> And it comes from a github address, with a pgp key that I've not seen
> before, and without me having been told about said maintainership
> updates. And while the  key has a lot of signatures, none of them are
> any that I have recognized previously from kernel development.

I agree on this point, and will have a different key with at least some
kernel developers signatures for 4.20 (which will be confusing again as
my key changes, but at least it shold have people you recognize).
I cannot say anything other than "I was not sufficiently prepared" for
4.19 and used whatever key I normally use after checking on pathfinder
that it was still "closeish" to you.

On the maintainership update, while it wasn't direct I believe Andrew
brought it up when adding me to the Cc of a 9p security report after you
added the current maintainers recently -- but, well, yes, it's not like
being told directly.
He has the MAINTAINER file update and am sure will send it to you
shortly so if preferable I can wait until he sends them to you and send
this PR (with a better tag) again at this point?

Thank you,
-- 
Dominique Martinet