From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sumit Garg Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 11:40:47 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/4] MAINTAINERS: Add entry for TEE based Trusted Keys Message-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: References: <1602065268-26017-1-git-send-email-sumit.garg@linaro.org> <1602065268-26017-5-git-send-email-sumit.garg@linaro.org> <20201013022157.GA47751@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20201013022157.GA47751@linux.intel.com> To: Jarkko Sakkinen Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Thompson , op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org, Jonathan Corbet , James Bottomley , Janne Karhunen , Linux Doc Mailing List , James Morris , Mimi Zohar , Linux Kernel Mailing List , David Howells , Luke Hinds , "open list:ASYMMETRIC KEYS" , Markus Wamser , Casey Schaufler , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, Jens Wiklander , linux-arm-kernel , "Serge E. Hallyn" On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 at 07:52, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 07, 2020 at 03:37:48PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: > > Add MAINTAINERS entry for TEE based Trusted Keys framework. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sumit Garg > > Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen > > --- > > MAINTAINERS | 8 ++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > index 48aff80..eb3d889 100644 > > --- a/MAINTAINERS > > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > @@ -9663,6 +9663,14 @@ F: include/keys/trusted-type.h > > F: include/keys/trusted_tpm.h > > F: security/keys/trusted-keys/ > > > > +KEYS-TRUSTED-TEE > > +M: Sumit Garg > > +L: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org > > +L: keyrings@vger.kernel.org > > +S: Supported > > +F: include/keys/trusted_tee.h > > +F: security/keys/trusted-keys/trusted_tee.c > > + > > KEYS/KEYRINGS > > M: David Howells > > M: Jarkko Sakkinen > > -- > > 2.7.4 > > I'm sorry but I think I have changed my mind on this. This has been > spinning for a while and sometimes conclusions change over the time. > > I don't think that we really need a separate subsystem tag. I don't see it as a separate subsystem but rather a kind of underlying trust source (TEE) driver plugged into existing trusted keys subsystem. We could relate it to the RNG subsystem as well where there is a subsystem maintainer and specific driver maintainers. IMO, having a dedicated entry like this brings clarity in maintenance and in future we may have more trust sources like this added where everyone may not have access to all the trust sources to test. > I'd be for a > new M-entry or R-entry to the existing subsystem tag. It's essential to > have ack from someone with ARM and TEE knowledge but this way too heavy > for the purpose. If you still think otherwise then I am fine with a new M-entry for existing trusted keys subsystem as well. > > I also see it the most manageable if the trusted keys PR's come from a > single source. I echo here with you to have a single source for trusted keys PR's irrespective of whether we go with a separate trust source entry or update existing subsystem entry. -Sumit > > /Jarkko