[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cb8b4ebaa35d79eba65b011d042d20a991adf540.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 11:59:07 -0400
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Lenny Szubowicz <lszubowi@...hat.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, andy.shevchenko@...il.com,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, serge@...lyn.com,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, prarit@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] integrity: Move import of MokListRT certs to a
separate routine
On Fri, 2020-09-11 at 11:54 -0400, Lenny Szubowicz wrote:
> On 9/11/20 11:02 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Sat, 5 Sep 2020 at 04:31, Lenny Szubowicz <lszubowi@...hat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Move the loading of certs from the UEFI MokListRT into a separate
> >> routine to facilitate additional MokList functionality.
> >>
> >> There is no visible functional change as a result of this patch.
> >> Although the UEFI dbx certs are now loaded before the MokList certs,
> >> they are loaded onto different key rings. So the order of the keys
> >> on their respective key rings is the same.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Lenny Szubowicz <lszubowi@...hat.com>
> >
> > Why did you drop Mimi's reviewed-by from this patch?
>
> It was not intentional. I was just not aware that I needed to propagate
> Mimi Zohar's reviewed-by from V1 of the patch to V2.
>
> Reviewed-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
>
> V2 includes changes in that patch to incorporate suggestions from
> Andy Shevchenko. My assumption was that the maintainer would
> gather up the reviewed-by and add any signed-off-by as appropriate,
> but it sounds like my assumption was incorrect. In retrospect, I
> could see that having the maintainer dig through prior versions
> of a patch set for prior reviewed-by tags could be burdensome.
As much as possible moving code should be done without making changes,
simpler for code review. Then as a separate patch you make changes.
That way you could also have retained my Reviewed-by.
Mimi
>
> Advice on the expected handling of this would be appreciated.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists