Re: [PATCH 1/2] USB: core: add a way to revoke access to open USB devices

[Bastien Nocera <hadess@hadess.net>]

On Tue, 2022-08-09 at 18:31 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 03:27:16PM +0200, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > The link to the user-space programme is in the "RFC v2" version of
> > the
> > patch from last week. It calls into the kernel through that
> > function
> > which is exported through BPF.
> > 
> > > 
> > > > > Again, just revoke the file descriptor, like the BSDs do for
> > > > > a
> > > > > tiny
> > > > > subset of device drivers.
> > > > > 
> > > > > This comes up ever so often, why does someone not just add
> > > > > real
> > > > > revoke(2) support to Linux to handle it if they really really
> > > > > want it
> > > > > (I
> > > > > tried a long time ago, but didn't have it in me as I had no
> > > > > real
> > > > > users
> > > > > for it...)
> > > > 
> > > > This was already explained twice,
> > > 
> > > Explained where?
> > 
> > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg225448.html
> > https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg229753.html
> 
> Please use lore.kernel.org.

Would be great if it showed up when somebody searches for "linux-usb
mailing-list".

> Anyway, pointing to random old submissions of an RFC series does not
> mean that you do not have to document and justify this design
> decision
> in this patch submission.

I guess me repeatedly asking for guidance as to what information I
should add to the commit message while I was being yelled at didn't get
through.

> Assume that reviewers have NO knowlege of previous submissions of
> your
> patch series.  Because we usually do not, given how many changes we
> review all the time.
> 
> Please resend this, as a v4, and update the changelog descriptions
> based
> on the comments so far on this series and I will be glad to review it
> sometime after -rc1 is out, as there's nothing I can do with it right
> now.

Sure.