linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Associate GDB scripts with their 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]

Message-Id: <20250625132228.b072618317afd2fbaaa3aaef@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 13:22:28 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kbingham@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: Associate GDB scripts with their
 subsystems

On Wed, 25 Jun 2025 21:38:20 +0200 Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> wrote:

> On 25.06.25 19:52, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > The GDB scripts under scripts/gdb/linux are very useful for inspecting
> > kernel data structures however they depend upon the internal APIs and
> > data structures which are updated without much consideration for those
> > scripts. This results in a near constant catching up with fixing the
> > scripts so they continue to work.
> > 
> > Associate the GDB scripts with their subsystems in the hope that they
> > get more love and attention.
> > 
> 
> ...
>
> I will surely support any proposal that helps connecting the scripts
> with subsystems they address. However, you should likely break up this
> one here into per-subsystem patches and address each affected
> maintainer. They should have a chance to accept or reject this potential
> extension of their responsibility.

I agree - this proposal doesn't seem very practical, really.

It might actually be harmful - if someone has an issue with a gdb script
they'll report that to the subsystem maintainer rather than to the GDB
script maintainers who are better equipped to address the issue.

And I'm not sure there's really a problem to fix here.  I'm seeing 13
commits to scripts/gdb this year and afaict only one (e0349c46cb4f
("scripts/gdb/linux/symbols.py: address changes to module_sect_attrs"))
looks like it is fixing up such a problem.