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;
Subject: Re: Bad file pattern in MAINTAINERS section 'KEYS-TRUSTED'
From:   James Bottomley <jejb@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        keyrings@vger.kernel.org, Mimi Zohar <zohar@us.ibm.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        Denis Kenzior <denkenz@gmail.com>,
        Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>,
        James Morris <james.morris@microsoft.com>
Date:   Tue, 26 Mar 2019 07:25:17 -0700
In-Reply-To: <1553602220.3960.29.camel@linux.ibm.com>
References: <7cd8d12f59bcacd18a78f599b46dac555f7f16c0.camel@perches.com>
         <20190325212705.26837-1-joe@perches.com>
         <20190326113725.GA10898@linux.intel.com>
         <1553602220.3960.29.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <1553610317.2900.2.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 08:10 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> 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?

Looking at the contents of linux/keys/trusted.h, it looks like the
wrong decision to move it.  The contents are way too improperly named
and duplicative to be in a standard header.  It's mostly actually TPM
code including a redefinition of the tpm_buf structure, so it doesn't
even seem to be necessary for trusted keys.

If you want to fix this as a bug, I'd move it back again, but long term
I think it should simply be combined with trusted.c because nothing
else can include it sanely anyway.

James