linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH Y.A. RESEND] MAINTAINERS: fix alpha. ordering

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:   Sun, 23 Jul 2017 13:05:30 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH Y.A. RESEND] MAINTAINERS: fix alpha. ordering

On Sun, 2017-07-23 at 12:49 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Ok, so I already applied your alpha-ordering patch, but it just annoyed me that
> 
>  (a) the ordering wasn't complete
> 
>  (b) this wasn't scripted.
> 
> However, the sane way of scripting it is clearly not to do it in C,
> which I'd be comfy with, because that would be insane.
> 
> Instead, it should be done in perl. Except my perl-fu is so horribly
> horribly bad that I'm a bit ashamed to show the end result.
> 
> Does anybody have actual real perl skills? Because somebody should
> double-check my appended script-from-hell.
> 
> ANYWAY. One reason I did this was because *if* we want to split up the
> MAINTAINERS file, I absolutely refuse to do it by hand. It needs to be
> automated. I'm not going to apply a patch - I'm going to apply a
> *script*, and commit the end result along with the doc about what the
> script was (so that then I have an inevitable conflict due to this big
> re-org, I can resolve the conflict by re-running the script on the
> side that wasn't part of the re-org, rather than having to do nasty
> things).
> 
> And this script could easily be extended to automate the scripting. So
> please, can somebody with perl-fu say that "yeah, that's the right
> perl model", or point me to what I did wrong?
> 
> The end result looks ok. I can run
> 
>     perl parse-maintainers.pl < MAINTAINERS > outfile
> 
> and the end result is actually a *properly* sorted MAINTAINERS file as
> far as I can tell.
> 
> Comments?

That works OK except for this section
where there are 2 header lines

EDAC-XGENE
APPLIED MICRO (APM) X-GENE SOC EDAC
M:     Loc Ho <lho@....com>
S:     Supported
F:     drivers/edac/xgene_edac.c
F:     Documentation/devicetree/bindings/edac/apm-xgene-edac.txt

If you take up the patch I sent for that
before you run the script, it should be OK.

https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9857337/

I'll send a get_maintainers patch that allows a few
different styles of MAINTAINERS files separately.

o A single top level MAINTAINERS file
o A MAINTAINERS directory with multiple section files
o MAINTAINERS files distributed around the kernel source tree