linux-kernel - Re: Status of Subsystems

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, 20 Aug 2019 13:15:50 -0400
From:   "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     Sebastian Duda <sebastian.duda@....de>
Cc:     Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lukas.bulwahn@...il.com
Subject: Re: Status of Subsystems

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 03:56:24PM +0200, Sebastian Duda wrote:
> 
> so the status of the files is inherited from the subsystem `INPUT MULTITOUCH
> (MT) PROTOCOL`?
> 
> Is it the same with the subsystem `NOKIA N900 POWER SUPPLY DRIVERS`
> (respectively `POWER SUPPLY CLASS/SUBSYSTEM and DRIVERS`)?

Note that the definitions of "subsystems" is not necessarily precise.
So assuming there is a strict subclassing and inheritance might not be
a perfect assumption.  There are some files which have no official
owner, and there are also some files which may be modified by more
than one subsystem.

We certainly don't talk about "inheritance" when we talk about
maintainers and sub-maintainers.  Furthermore, the relationships,
processes, and workflows between a particular maintainer and their
submaintainers can be unique to a particular maintainer.

We define these terms to be convenient for Linux development, and like
many human institutions, they can be flexible and messy.  The goal was
*not* define things so it would be convenient for academics writing
papers --- like insects under glass.

Cheers,

						- Ted