linux-kernel - Re: get_maintainers.pl subsystem output

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, 23 Jul 2019 10:42:48 +0200
From:   Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>
To:     "Duda, Sebastian" <sebastian.duda@....de>
Cc:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ralf Ramsauer <ralf.ramsauer@...-regensburg.de>,
        Wolfgang Mauerer <wolfgang.mauerer@...-regensburg.de>
Subject: Re: get_maintainers.pl subsystem output

Hi Sebastian, Hi Joe,

On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 9:30 AM Duda, Sebastian <sebastian.duda@....de> wrote:
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> when analyzing the patch
> `<20150128012747.824898918@...uxfoundation.org>` [1] with
> `get_maintainers.pl --subsystem --status --separator , /tmp/patch`,
> there is the following output:
>
>      Chris Mason <clm@...com> (maintainer:BTRFS FILE SYSTEM),Josef Bacik
> <jbacik@...com> (maintainer:BTRFS FILE SYSTEM),David Sterba
> <dsterba@...e.cz> (maintainer:BTRFS FILE SYSTEM),Alexander Viro
> <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> (maintainer:FILESYSTEMS (VFS and
> infrastructure)),"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu> (maintainer:EXT4 FILE
> SYSTEM),Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca> (maintainer:EXT4 FILE
> SYSTEM),Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org> (maintainer:F2FS FILE
> SYSTEM),Changman Lee <cm224.lee@...sung.com> (maintainer:F2FS FILE
> SYSTEM),Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> (maintainer:FUSE: FILESYSTEM
> IN USERSPACE),Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com> (supporter:GFS2
> FILE SYSTEM),Anton Altaparmakov <anton@...era.com> (supporter:NTFS
> FILESYSTEM),Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com> (maintainer:TMPFS (SHMEM
> FILESYSTEM)),linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org (open list:BTRFS FILE
> SYSTEM),linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org (open
> list),linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org (open list:FILESYSTEMS (VFS and
> infrastructure)),linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org (open list:EXT4 FILE
> SYSTEM),linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net (open list:F2FS FILE
> SYSTEM),fuse-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net (open list:FUSE: FILESYSTEM IN
> USERSPACE),cluster-devel@...hat.com (open list:GFS2 FILE
> SYSTEM),linux-ntfs-dev@...ts.sourceforge.net (open list:NTFS
> FILESYSTEM),linux-mm@...ck.org (open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT)
>      Maintained,Buried alive in reporters,Supported
>      BTRFS FILE SYSTEM,THE REST,FILESYSTEMS (VFS and infrastructure),EXT4
> FILE SYSTEM,F2FS FILE SYSTEM,FUSE: FILESYSTEM IN USERSPACE,GFS2 FILE
> SYSTEM,NTFS FILESYSTEM,MEMORY MANAGEMENT,TMPFS (SHMEM FILESYSTEM)
>
> How can I parse this output automatically? or how can I generate a
> parsable output?
>
> I need the tuples of subsystems and status:
> (THE REST, Buried alive in reporters)
> (TMPFS, Maintained)
> (BTRFS FILE SYSTEM, Maintained)
> …
> (GFS2 FILE SYSTEM, Supported)
>
> I'm not aware how to reliably assign the statuses to the subsystems.
>

Joe, I hope this example makes more clear what and how Sebastian would
actually like to have the information from the MAINTAINERS file
presented for our use case. Currently, we would consider
get_maintainer.pl to be the proper place for such a feature in the
upstream development.

Joe, would you support and would you accept if we extend
get_maintainer.pl to provide output of the status in such a way that
the status output can be clearly mapped to the subsystem?
If so, we would try our best to extend the current script and sent
those patches back to lkml for review and inclusion.
If you do not support to extend get_maintainer.pl as we suggest, we
would probably simply write our own specific script (probably then in
python) to parse MAINTAINERS and extract and present the information
as we need for our use case.

Sebastian, Considering style of mail interaction, please do not use top posting:
If you want to answer to a specific point of the previous mail
discussion, keep only the relevant part for your answer (delete the
rest!) and answer inline.
If you start a new discussion and do not refer to any points of the
previous discussion very specifically, just delete the whole previous
discussion and do not resend the content of previous mails.

Best regards,

Lukas