linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: Make x86@...nel.org a list and not a maintainer

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: <f472c4ab-9ca2-4183-8f95-8390bc35e068@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 14:44:40 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
 Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Make x86@...nel.org a list and not a maintainer

On 8/20/25 14:41, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 14:37:57 -0700
> Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:
>>> The MAINTAINERS document starts with:
>>>
>>>         M: *Mail* patches to: FullName <address@...ain>
>>> 	[..]
>>>         L: *Mailing list* that is relevant to this area  
>> Yeah, it's not a person, but it's also not a list that folks can
>> subscribe to. So there really isn't a good fit for it. I've never heard
>> of it causing any problems, so my inclination would be to just leave it
>> as-is.
> My complaint is that it's listed as both 'L' and 'M'. It should at least be
> consistent.

Ahh, gotcha. I didn't realize how many entries we had pointing to it!

The main one is:

	X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)
	...
	M:      x86@...nel.org

so if we're going to be making it consistent, I'd move them all over to
M:, not L:.

But I'm still not seeing much of a problem here. :)