From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Biggers Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH] fscrypt: remove filesystem specific build config option Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2019 10:29:50 -0800 Message-ID: <20190124182949.GB10448@gmail.com> References: <20190110233230.GA23953@roeck-us.net> <20190111010116.GG149637@gmail.com> <20190124050337.GD8785@mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190124050337.GD8785@mit.edu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" , Guenter Roeck , Chandan Rajendra , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-f2fs-devel.lists.sourceforge.net On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 12:03:37AM -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 05:01:17PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > > > > Indeed, Chandan Rajendra sent out a new version of the patch which fixes the > > problem (by removing the 'select BLOCK' from fs/ubifs/Kconfig), but it never > > made it into the fscrypt tree and hence never made it into linux-next. > > > > Ted, what you are planning to do with the fscrypt tree following the fsverity > > discussion? IMO, we should keep the fsverity stuff in its own branch, separate > > from any fscrypt changes. As a suggestion, in the branch "fscrypt" of my > > linux.git repo [1], I applied just these four patches on top of v5.0-rc1 and > > resolved the conflicts with them no longer being on top of fsverity... > > Sorry, I was on vacation last week and I've been catching up on things > this week. I've reset the master branch on my fscrypt.git tree so > that it has what you have on your fscrypt branch, rebased to 5.0-rc3. > > Also, as we had talked about earlier, it probably makes sense to set > up jointly maintained git tree for fscrypt and fsverity. My proposal > is that we set up a new fscrypt.git tree, at > /pub/scm/fs/fscrypt/fscrypt.git, that would be owned by the "FSCRYPT > group", with group membership being ebiggers, jaeguk, and tytso. > We'll have to figure out ways that we can jointly update the git tree > without stepping on each other, probably using a group chat. Does > that sound good to you? > Hi Ted, that sounds good to me. I assume you know how to get that set up? Also, should I go ahead and send a patch that adds myself to the MAINTAINERS file? - Eric