From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C47E6C25B0C for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 17:16:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S244540AbiHIRQg convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Aug 2022 13:16:36 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56364 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S242610AbiHIRQe (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Aug 2022 13:16:34 -0400 Received: from relay11.mail.gandi.net (relay11.mail.gandi.net [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc4:8::231]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F3A32668; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 10:16:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: (Authenticated sender: hadess@hadess.net) by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B0FEC100007; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 17:16:29 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <6f3fa6727e14f39a8c7c32fffb8c3e92cf95b5d5.camel@hadess.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] USB: core: add a way to revoke access to open USB devices From: Bastien Nocera To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, Alan Stern , Benjamin Tissoires , Peter Hutterer , "Eric W . Biederman" , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2022 19:16:29 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <20220809094300.83116-1-hadess@hadess.net> <20220809094300.83116-2-hadess@hadess.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.4 (3.44.4-1.fc36) MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org 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.