linux-kernel - Re: Link: tag and links to submission and reports (was: Re: [GIT pull] core/urgent for v5.18-rc6)

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3cf09576-66f2-b18c-0057-2635fc9452de@leemhuis.info>
Date:   Thu, 12 May 2022 10:43:07 +0200
From:   Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Zhangfei Gao <zhangfei.gao@...mail.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
        Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Link: tag and links to submission and reports (was: Re: [GIT
 pull] core/urgent for v5.18-rc6)

On 11.05.22 21:35, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 08:55:34AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 8:50 AM Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> I would argue that it should be the patch submitter's responsibility
>>> to explicitly add a URL to the problem report.
>>
>> I agree in the perfect case.
>>
>> But in practice, we have a lot more patch submitters than we have
>> maintainers, and not all "leaf developers" necessarily know how to do
>> everything.
>>
>> So the maintainer should probably expect to fix things up. Not always,
>> but also not a "the developer should have done this, so I won't do it"
>>
>> This isn't so different from the fact that not everybody writes
>> English proficiently - people do hopefully end up fixing things up as
>> they get passed onwards.
> 
> And, in addition, what happens most often in my experience is I
> constantly get to point submitters to our process documentation -
> submitting-patches especially - as not a small number of them are not
> aware of different aspects of the whole patch dance: tags, SOB chains,
> etc. And the Link tag is no exception here.

Which leads to the question: can we (and do we want to) teach
scripts/checkpatch.pl to point out when a Link: tag is missing and
likely appropriate? If a "Reported-by:" is present there should be a
"Link:" as well, unless the issue was reported privately, via IRC or
something like that. A "Fixes:" tag is also a strong indicator that a
link might be appropriate, but not as good.

Ciao, Thorsten