Received: by 2002:ac0:bc90:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id a16csp4203019img; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 05:11:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqww06q40G2qxbwtxmChMoaNl3ER8E9iicdfDEBhwDPhJcQXA4fAX6pQ+DGhVCQP8u4bbcpa X-Received: by 2002:a63:43c1:: with SMTP id q184mr27947991pga.110.1553602299706; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 05:11:39 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1553602299; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=OS3zT/h4API1yvXnK00wU4266uUYFNsRRLnM6M6Vf9dYkCbUllUONQ8lsyb0SkXiP1 z5ZTlgcQ7WnuYfmSlx6RP9uBJviFRY7GNjp3PMBvjw03MwlKY4S4k9qxFiSneh3PrplF XTwzLjgENBhEs8vaX/Ag5HNtpaykJb8XLvVYwkNejrixweFQtkjwQRuN+VsWnWw9mvjw CDZvN8dhuUkD9V8rUTfZlnhnfJeEO/zmv7wa+Eg8bG9/8Nzzxg1F+7TaymT/QlnJjHbR TBWBmypUDYcf1zBcvvGqxKy0LwDJDCD4oj1oc7QI0VM6iMkyYKAR9d43xlStmIS9WoXs XhYg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject; bh=3gv7Ki1uU0KrP5hFyDGOnCSoi8zcda/vRyd8fWeKww0=; b=UNsPASQJK9OKVB+jr2WqbrWFk8d5ZB8gckooWXSH7TuoB4DipQcBoLNmUDiGVMJ8Jv Lp3Qojcxczvvz+7V/JUNUBdL3rkJF3lbF81ZyW8Oyv+pv+EpAkKjST0v3TUx98Iz3ZvP 7nFBsrDVL2Gq2gbH2WV4qdooMtRB1tGZ6axGyochCmdAMljKh9kpbwMHSAAXB79oEIJP m4rFjLGp05ilNpe6wJYb8p9pmAMNsrvI1HgqesW+C9vXhyZZ4R9cLGjdWpEaHmvqqgLy j28CGEtWOZT6Wj2JS2s7DMIj0ghpgllL8gw1wSk/SDYu+FGcoHi9aUZL5DuPabR3eBrO rEXw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id l72si16255464pfj.149.2019.03.26.05.11.23; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 05:11:39 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731488AbfCZMKm (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 26 Mar 2019 08:10:42 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:52368 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725776AbfCZMKl (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Mar 2019 08:10:41 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x2QC5ZVe021374 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 08:10:40 -0400 Received: from e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2rfjd33utm-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 08:10:40 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 12:10:36 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.198) by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.133) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Tue, 26 Mar 2019 12:10:33 -0000 Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (mk.ibm.com [9.149.105.60]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x2QCAWgC32112698 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 26 Mar 2019 12:10:32 GMT Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A0654203F; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 12:10:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id E362F42042; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 12:10:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.80.109.68]) by d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 12:10:30 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: Bad file pattern in MAINTAINERS section 'KEYS-TRUSTED' From: Mimi Zohar To: Jarkko Sakkinen , Joe Perches Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, James Bottomley , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, Mimi Zohar , David Howells , James Morris , Denis Kenzior , Marcel Holtmann , James Morris Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 08:10:20 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20190326113725.GA10898@linux.intel.com> References: <7cd8d12f59bcacd18a78f599b46dac555f7f16c0.camel@perches.com> <20190325212705.26837-1-joe@perches.com> <20190326113725.GA10898@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19032612-0012-0000-0000-000003074655 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19032612-0013-0000-0000-0000213E6E9C Message-Id: <1553602220.3960.29.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-03-26_08:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=930 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1903260087 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Jarrko, On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 13:37 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > Mimi, > > Can you fix this and I can ack and send PR through my tree? Making the "trusted.h" include file public was part of David's "KEYS: Support TPM-wrapped key and crypto ops" patch set.  I wasn't involved in reviewing or upstreaming this patch set.  As I recall, it was upstreamed rather quickly without much review.  As it is TPM related, it should have at least been posted on the linux-integrity mailing list.  I have no idea if "trusted.h" should have been made public. I'm not sure just "fixing" the MAINTAINERS file is the right solution.  I was hoping to look at it later this week.  Perhaps you and James could take a look? Mimi