linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 54/56] x86: Remove void casts

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, 08 Apr 2009 21:45:54 +0100
From:	Jack Stone <jwjstone@...tmail.fm>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Bert Wesarg <bert.wesarg@...glemail.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jeff@...zik.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 54/56] x86: Remove void casts

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> In theory we could put regex patterns into MAINTAINERS. Something 
> like this:
>
> LOCKDEP AND LOCKSTAT
> P:	Peter Zijlstra
> M:	peterz@...radead.org
> P:	Ingo Molnar
> M:	mingo@...hat.com
> L:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> T:	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/peterz/linux-2.6-lockdep.git
> F:	kernel/lock*
> F:	include/linux/lockdep.h
> S:	Maintained
>
> Note: there are files that fall under multiple maintainers so this 
> wouldnt be a 'precise' thing - but it would sure be useful.
>
> ( There's also other details like subdirectories within a larger 
>   hiearchy and there being overlap between problems. Sometimes they 
>   are sub-maintained, sometimes they are exclusive so pure glob
>   patterns are probably not enough. )
>
> If this concept looks good to you ... i'd suggest that before you do 
> a large patch against MAINTAINERS mapping all the maintainer 
> domains, could you just do it for a few cases and send an RFC patch 
> to lkml?
>
> If there's a general upstream buy-in and a there's a 
> scripts/list-maintainers.sh script that takes advantage of it then 
> all this would be rather useful. (and i've Cc:-ed Andrew and Linus - 
> if this is to be shot down due to fundamental objections then better 
> do it at the early stages ;-)
>
> Plus checkpatch could be extended to check whether the Cc: list in a 
> patch properly matches the patterns in MAINTAINERS.
>
> If done propery this would save us from quite a few mechanic "hm, 
> who maintains _that_ file??" searches and it would also save 
> maintainers from quite a few "hm, who queued up _that_ crap without 
> Cc:-ing me??" moments.
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>   
That has already been done. Someone just so happened to submit
such a patch today.

http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123916809504492&w=2

Thanks,

Jack


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/