From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mta1.formilux.org (mta1.formilux.org [51.159.59.229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02E0735F185; Thu, 2 Apr 2026 19:05:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=51.159.59.229 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775156749; cv=none; b=GL9KdPTe4teunppBjP/Hu4Qw9ejwtNJRby3x6Tz4yuDlEq6t3h4b+QR8Q821JyjwRNdm/o2ut0e6GZeGq865Xwcc3IbZBqyrdOCKpRWPKjadeMvI5sWO6kE4CNSjblvL6MRqUgsUY7XGD4SUhxhrYcHGlIHkgyAZr3Sg/ybbFt0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775156749; c=relaxed/simple; bh=DpRgumJvGtBGYpHt5STFCTt11roPXeCzOgvCCRl9rAA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=fqVV/RdeW2uwViZYFrwJVzgfGYIZmuUhrAc0iKpeLeN6j1jRdycEaXIJtw+hjXsLoOkcSKgRm2OjeEVLCbHpb3VNMsFkwLdE17L/EoM4koderMgAfAH46VUXdTgs0lGSRn4sEOPZM8bmfJcm0VW8Y32lP2oNUFE64+nFpo1NMcw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=1wt.eu; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=1wt.eu; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=1wt.eu header.i=@1wt.eu header.b=P+Z+Z4v9; arc=none smtp.client-ip=51.159.59.229 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=1wt.eu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=1wt.eu Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=1wt.eu header.i=@1wt.eu header.b="P+Z+Z4v9" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1wt.eu; s=mail; t=1775156745; bh=33Nx55sN5ViJ7cBIYn9//CGgH5xtdY6wsR4y3ZzqaHU=; h=From:Message-ID:From; b=P+Z+Z4v9b9WtptaP9tvJsUy1EN1bBtF8igV8Fl40tGOg+elRuashrfZyYnuo1oe/7 1ehqZNktICFl5Gex8PDNdlDZd4yFwQH8ATChT2SNM1PpqRV3JsTCjft2Z3cChhKoNc 6/C1qrebTr6NlHSZMJGBC5FieYq8n6kWRXQRJFug= Received: from 1wt.eu (ded1.1wt.eu [163.172.96.212]) by mta1.formilux.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86628C0AA1; Thu, 02 Apr 2026 21:05:45 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2026 21:05:45 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: Randy Dunlap Cc: greg@kroah.com, edumazet@google.com, Jonathan Corbet , skhan@linuxfoundation.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Documentation: explain how to find maintainers addresses for security reports Message-ID: References: <20260402182655.8636-1-w@1wt.eu> <20260402182655.8636-3-w@1wt.eu> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Apr 02, 2026 at 11:42:51AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > > On 4/2/26 11:26 AM, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > These days, 80% of the work done by the security team consists in > > locating the affected subsystem in a report, running get_maintainers on > > it, forwarding the report to these persons and responding to the reporter > > with them in Cc. This is a huge and unneeded overhead that we must try to > > lower for a better overall efficiency. This patch adds a complete section > > explaining how to figure the list of recipients to send the report to. > > > > Cc: Eric Dumazet > > Cc: Greg KH > > Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau > > --- > > Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 73 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst b/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst > > index da7937fd59df..6937fa9fba5a 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst > > +++ b/Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst > > > > Markdown, HTML and RST formatted reports are particularly frowned upon since > > they're quite hard to read for humans and encourage to use dedicated viewers, > > sometimes online, which by definition is not acceptable for a confidential > > -security report. > > +security report. Note that some mailers tend to mangle formatting of plain > > +text by default, please consult :doc:`the email client howto > > +<../process/email-clients>` for more info. > > Just use the file name and let automarkup do its job: > > text by default; please consult Documentation/process/email-clients.rst > for more information. > > It's also more convenient for text readers that way. If that's supposed to work, I'm indeed all for it! I must confess that I have not even understood the reason for "../process" when coming from the same directory, but I just picked that from existing entries. Thanks for your feedback, much appreciated! Willy