linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: target/sbp: remove firewire SBP target driver

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]

Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.22.394.2006161929380.8@nippy.intranet>
Date:   Tue, 16 Jun 2020 19:42:23 +1000 (AEST)
From:   Finn Thain <fthain@...egraphics.com.au>
To:     Chris Boot <bootc@....tc>
cc:     linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, target-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        Chuhong Yuan <hslester96@...il.com>,
        "Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Nicholas Bellinger <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>,
        Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: target/sbp: remove firewire SBP target driver

On Mon, 15 Jun 2020, Chris Boot wrote:

> On 15/06/2020 00:28, Finn Thain wrote:
> > On Sun, 14 Jun 2020, Chris Boot wrote:
> > 
> >> I expect that if someone finds this useful it can stick around (but 
> >> that's not my call).
> > 
> > Who's call is that? If the patch had said "From: Martin K. Petersen" 
> > and "This driver is being removed because it has the following 
> > defects..." that would be some indication of a good-faith willingness 
> > to accept users as developers in the spirit of the GPL, which is what 
> > you seem to be alluding to (?).
> 
> If you're asking me, I'd say it was martin's call:
> 
> > SCSI TARGET SUBSYSTEM                                                          
> > M:      "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>                      
> [...]
> > F:      drivers/target/                                                        
> > F:      include/target/                                                        
> 

The question I asked you was intended to make you think. I wasn't asking 
you to search MAINTAINERS for "drivers/target" (I had already done so).

Chris, you can find my name in that file too. That's because I see my role 
as custodian of that particular code. That code lives in the kernel.org 
tree because others put it there and because users find it useful -- not 
merely because it happens to please the official glorious MAINTAINER of 
said code.

If you would ask, "who's call is it to delete drivers/nubus? or 
drivers/scsi/NCR5380.c?" my answer is, I have no idea.

> >> I just don't have the time or inclination or hardware to be able to 
> >> maintain it anymore, so someone else would have to pick it up.
> >>
> > 
> > Which is why most drivers get orphaned, right?
> 
> Sure, but that's not what Martin asked me to do, hence this patch.
> 

Martin said, "I'd appreciate a patch to remove it"

And Bart said, "do you want to keep this driver in the kernel tree?"

AFAICT both comments are quite ambiguous. I don't see an actionable 
request, just an expression of interest from people doing their jobs.

Note well: there is no pay check associated with having a MAINTAINERS file 
entry.