linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH 5/5] MAINTAINERS: Update pstore maintainers

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:   Wed, 16 Nov 2022 12:42:53 -0300
From:   "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...lia.com>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Anton Vorontsov <anton@...msg.org>,
        Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Paramjit Oberoi <pso@...omium.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] MAINTAINERS: Update pstore maintainers

On 11/10/2022 17:01, Kees Cook wrote:
> Update pstore to better reflect reality of active contributors:
> 
> - Remove Anton and Colin (thank you for your help through the years!)
> - Move Tony to Reviewer
> - Add Guilherme as Reviewer
> - Add mailing list
> - Upgrade to Supported
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> ---
>  MAINTAINERS | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Hi Kees, sorry to revamp this thread for a "tangential" topic, but it
feels a "kinda" proper thread.

Since I was added as a reviewer on pstore (in linux-next so far), I
started to receive a bunch of emails from ARM device-tree folks; they're
adding ramoops entries to their DTs and looping pstore folks.

Examples:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-hardening/20221111120156.48040-1-angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com/

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-hardening/20221116145616.17884-1-luca@z3ntu.xyz/

Personally, I have no knowledge of these HW to evaluate if the ramoops
setting is appropriate, so they're nop from my side, I just delete them.
But that raises the question - are you/Tony reviewing this kind of
change? It's not related to pstore/ramoops code, it's just users setting
ramoops in their DTs, so seems to me a bit far from the purpose of the
pstore entry.

What do you/Tony think about that? Likely the DT folks are following
this entry in the MAINTAINERS to send these emails:

PSTORE FILESYSTEM
M:      Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
[...]
F:      include/linux/pstore*
K:      \b(pstore|ramoops) <------

Should this be kept? Maybe only the ramoops entry could be removed?

Again, totally fine be me to keep'em, it's just that I'm receiving and
ignoring the emails, so if everybody else is doing the same, better to
just remove this entry from MAINTAINERS.

Thanks,

Guilherme