From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFFA6C43381 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 15:04:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89B0020859 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 15:04:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725890AbfBTPEu (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2019 10:04:50 -0500 Received: from mga05.intel.com ([192.55.52.43]:32849 "EHLO mga05.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725822AbfBTPEu (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2019 10:04:50 -0500 X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Feb 2019 07:04:49 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.58,391,1544515200"; d="scan'208";a="148394532" Received: from vanderss-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.249.254.177]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 Feb 2019 07:04:46 -0800 Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 17:04:45 +0200 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: jmorris@namei.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Huewe , Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add linux-security-module mailing list to TPM drivers Message-ID: <20190220150445.GA4794@linux.intel.com> References: <20190220035846.6272-1-jsnitsel@redhat.com> <20190220070413.GB23027@linux.intel.com> <20190220140357.5vbepgmexso3jc6d@cantor> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190220140357.5vbepgmexso3jc6d@cantor> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 07:03:57AM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > On Wed Feb 20 19, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 08:58:46PM -0700, Jerry Snitselaar wrote: > > > I've seen requests to add linux-security-module to tpm patch > > > submissions a couple of times recently, so just add the list > > > to MAINTAINERS so get_maintainers.pl will mention it. > > > > > > Cc: Peter Huewe > > > Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen > > > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe > > > Signed-off-by: Jerry Snitselaar > > > > I guess James should say something about this. > > > > /Jarkko > > Sorry, I meant to add James as well. > > Maybe this isn't needed. Do you only want certain patches > being cc'd to linux-security-module? Looking back at > recent patches, it looked like it was a general request. > If it is, I'll be more likely to remember if get_maintainers.pl > brings it up. :) I'm all open here. Not sure which practices apply to IMA. I kind of tend to dilate to question does it make sense to CC to LSM for two reasons: 1. I think the original reason was that tpmdd mailing list was small. Now with the new linux-integrity mailing list up and running there is more eyes looking at the code. And more importantly the people are subscribed who use TPM for something, like IMA developers. 2. I don't remember ever reading within the time that I've been maintaining even a single comment from anyone that works with LSM's. The value of CC'ing there is not very significant, which means that most of the time the TPM traffic is just noise on that list. /Jarkko