Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 20 Feb 2019 15:39:03 -0700
From:   Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
To:     James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
Cc:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add linux-security-module mailing list to
 TPM drivers
Message-ID: <20190220223903.dusft4bbd33hu2qi@cantor>
Reply-To: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@redhat.com>
Mail-Followup-To: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
References: <20190220035846.6272-1-jsnitsel@redhat.com>
 <20190220070413.GB23027@linux.intel.com>
 <20190220140357.5vbepgmexso3jc6d@cantor>
 <20190220150445.GA4794@linux.intel.com>
 <alpine.LRH.2.21.1902210747510.1411@namei.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1902210747510.1411@namei.org>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu Feb 21 19, James Morris wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Feb 2019, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>
>> > 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.
>
>Sounds about right, there used to be more security folk on LSM and not as
>many on the TPM list, but the new integrity list works well for TPM now.
>
>
>-- 
>James Morris
><jmorris@namei.org>
>

Okay. Ignore this patch then.