Re: Path forward for NFC in the kernel

Re: Path forward for NFC in the kernel

[David Heidelberg]

On 17/04/2026 09:18, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 16/04/2026 19:10, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> Hi folks!
>>
>> We are struggling to keep up with the number of security reports and AI
>> generated patches in the kernel. NFC is infamous for being a huge CVE
>> magnet. We need someone to step up as a maintainer, create an NFC tree
>> and handle all the incoming submissions. Send us (or Linus if you
>> prefer) periodic PRs, like WiFi, Bluetooth etc. do. If that does not
>> happen I'm afraid we'll have to move the NFC code out of the tree,
>> put it up on GH or some such, and let it accumulate CVEs there..
>>
>> I'm planning to send a PR to Linus to shed the unmaintained code early
>> next week. We need to have a maintainer established by then.
> 
> +Cc David Heidelberg recently trying to use Linux NFC stack,
> 
+Cc oe-linux-nfc@lists.linux.dev

For now we had NFC related discussion in our sdm845-next channel, but I brought 
Matrix channel [1] for the kernel, neard, user-space discussion, so people can 
share and interact in real-time (the chat content is public without needing to 
join the room).

David


[1] https://matrix.to/#/#linux-nfc:ixit.cz

...

Re: Path forward for NFC in the kernel

[David Heidelberg]

On 21/04/2026 16:10, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2026 10:12:22 +0200 David Heidelberg wrote:
>>> +Cc David Heidelberg recently trying to use Linux NFC stack,
>>>
>>> Just "collecting" patches is not a big deal, I could do this, but
>>> actually reviewing the patches with necessary due diligence is the
>>> effort I could not provide in a reasonable time frame. And picking up
>>> patches without proper review feels risky...
>>
>> Hello Krzystof, Jakub,
>>
>> thanks for putting me into loop.
>>
>> I can do limited reviews and basic maintenance. My knowledge about NFC is for
>> now somehow limited (but I'm willing to invest my limited time into learning more).
>>
>> As "I & LLM" wrote [1] userspace very basic reader for GNOME and planning to do
>> more tight integration into GNOME, so would make sense to keep the kernel stack
>> alive.
> 
> Hi David!
> 
> Sorry for the delay, we (core maintainers) discussed the situation
> off-list and since our choices are either delete all this code or give
> you a chance, everyone agreed that the latter is strictly better :)
> It's a little unusual to designate someone who doesn't have a proven
> track record acting as a de facto maintainer, but such are the times...
> 
> Our expectation would be that:
>   - you'd create your own tree to gather NFC patches and send us
>     periodic pull requests every 2 or 3 weeks, with what you gathered
>   - act upon submissions within 48h of posting (excluding weekends)
> 
> Of course we'll happy to provide any support and guidance you need,
> specially for the first few months.
> 
> Is this what you had in mind? The phrase "limited reviews and basic
> maintenance" is slightly worrying, we assumed it's an expression of
> modesty rather than commitment? :)

Hi,

thanks for giving me the opportunity - I appreciate the trust, especially given 
the circumstances.

Yes, this is broadly in line with what I had in mind. To clarify the “limited 
reviews and basic maintenance” phrasing: that was more an attempt to set 
expectations conservatively. I’m prepared to take on the responsibilities you 
outlined — maintaining a tree, collecting and triaging patches, and sending 
regular pull requests.

Regarding reviews and responsiveness: I can do the 48h turnaround for initial 
feedback on submissions (excluding weekends, and occasional travel), and I’ll 
make sure no patch sits unattended. For more complex changes where my current 
NFC-specific knowledge may be a limiting factor, I’ll seek input rather than let 
things stall.

I’m also planning to ramp up my familiarity with the NFC stack as I go, so I 
expect both the quality and depth of my reviews to improve over time.

If that works for you, I’ll proceed with setting up a public tree and start 
tracking incoming patches.

Thanks again for the support - I’ll likely take you up on that, especially early on.

Best regards,
David

Re: Path forward for NFC in the kernel

[Jakub Kicinski]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2026 15:11:16 +0200 David Heidelberg wrote:
> Yes, this is broadly in line with what I had in mind. To clarify the “limited 
> reviews and basic maintenance” phrasing: that was more an attempt to set 
> expectations conservatively. I’m prepared to take on the responsibilities you 
> outlined — maintaining a tree, collecting and triaging patches, and sending 
> regular pull requests.
> 
> Regarding reviews and responsiveness: I can do the 48h turnaround for initial 
> feedback on submissions (excluding weekends, and occasional travel), and I’ll 
> make sure no patch sits unattended. For more complex changes where my current 
> NFC-specific knowledge may be a limiting factor, I’ll seek input rather than let 
> things stall.

Sounds good. The discussion taking long is perfectly fine. Main concern
to us is not hearing any response for a long time. Then we have to guess
whether the maintainer is planning to respond, or AWOL.

> I’m also planning to ramp up my familiarity with the NFC stack as I go, so I 
> expect both the quality and depth of my reviews to improve over time.
> 
> If that works for you, I’ll proceed with setting up a public tree and start 
> tracking incoming patches.

Works! :)