linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: update MEMORY MAPPING section

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: <e3a61eb1-2224-4700-8df2-28a93e2aa1a6@suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2024 09:25:43 +0100
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>, Lorenzo Stoakes
 <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jeff Xu <jeffxu@...omium.org>, "Liam R . Howlett"
 <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: update MEMORY MAPPING section

On 12/13/24 06:50, Yu Zhao wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 11:57 AM Lorenzo Stoakes
> <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I'd like to be added as a reviewer on mm/mseal.c.  Is there any way to
>> > indicate this from this file ?

I don't think the format and tooling supports adding a reviewer for a single
file out of a subsystem. mm/mseal.c would have to be an own subsystem, or
Jeff would be indicated as a reviewer for whole memory mapping.

>> This is something we can consider in the future, sure.
> 
> What'd be the downsides of having an additional reviewer?

General answer to general question: being R: means 1. getting email for
patches touching the files (if people use tooling properly, sigh). This can
be also achieved on the receiver wised by e.g. the lei tool.
2. being perceived as an authority for people sending patches, some of them
not being familiar with the subsystem and the people working on it. This is
why it could be counter productive to be given out to just anyone who asks.

> Especially
> the one who wrote the code...

This comes back to the issue of limiting the R: to mseal.