linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] MAINTAINERS: add a maintainer for the SPI NOR subsystem

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:   Tue, 18 Oct 2016 21:02:27 +0200
From:   Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To:     Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>
Cc:     Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@...el.com>,
        Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>,
        "linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
        nicolas.ferre@...el.com,
        Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>,
        David Oberhollenzer <david.oberhollenzer@...ma-star.at>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] MAINTAINERS: add a maintainer for the SPI NOR
 subsystem

Brian,

On 18.10.2016 20:46, Brian Norris wrote:
>>> I totally agree with you so if Marek and you volunteer as well, your help
>>> will be precious!
>>
>> Well, my SPI-NOR fu is not strong. And UBI/UBIFS keeps me busy.
>> But if Brian likes the idea of having a MTD maintainer team I'll offer my help.
> 
> I think a MTD maintainer team would be good to try, and I think it might
> help to resolve my above complaint; a maintainer team could help to make
> sure that everything can be coordinated in one tree + pull request,
> without adding too many extra points of failure (e.g., so we don't have
> awesome SPI NOR and NAND trees get bogged down by a slow MTD pull).
> 
> Random thoughts:
> 
>  Does it make sense to still use infradead.org? We'd need to add a few
>  users there.

What else do you have in mind? kernel.org?
As long all users with commit access are member of the kernel.org web of
trust any host should be fine.

>  Trust? I have met most of you in person, but not all, and I don't have
>  signed keys from all of you. I don't know what the best way to get a
>  group-writeable repo with credentials for all of you that we can trust.
>  (FWIW, neither Artem nor David met me, but they saw it fit to grant me
>  infradead.org access ;) )

I'd go with the kernel.org web of trust.

>  Coordination: how do we avoid stepping on each other's toes? We'd have
>  to definitely 100% kill 'git push -f' and 'git rebase'. Also, would
>  patchwork help or hurt us here? I think Boris and I have been sort of
>  using it, but it's still got a pretty good backlog (partly real --
>  i.e., the cause for this thread; and partly artificial, due to
>  accounting).

patchwork should be a good start. We could also try the tip scripts used
by the x86 maintainer team.
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git/tree/.tip?h=tip

>  What to do about mtd-utils.git? That's been languishing a bit, and it
>  has no release schedule. Maybe we want a plan for that too.

I'd volunteer to nurse it together with David Oberhollenzer.
In fact, David is currently preparing a v2 pre-release of mtd-utils.
https://github.com/sigma-star/mtd-utils/commits/wip_v2-rc1

We reworked a lot of code and added new tools.

Thanks,
//richard