Re: [PATCH v7 4/4] MAINTAINERS: Add entry for TEE based Trusted Keys
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <hidden>
Date: 2020-10-13 02:47:27
Also in:
keyrings, linux-arm-kernel, linux-doc, linux-integrity, lkml, op-tee
On Wed, Oct 07, 2020 at 03:37:48PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Add MAINTAINERS entry for TEE based Trusted Keys framework. Signed-off-by: Sumit Garg <redacted> Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <redacted> --- MAINTAINERS | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index 48aff80..eb3d889 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b/MAINTAINERS@@ -9663,6 +9663,14 @@ F: include/keys/trusted-type.h F: include/keys/trusted_tpm.h F: security/keys/trusted-keys/ +KEYS-TRUSTED-TEE +M: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@linaro.org> +L: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org +L: keyrings@vger.kernel.org +S: Supported +F: include/keys/trusted_tee.h +F: security/keys/trusted-keys/trusted_tee.c + KEYS/KEYRINGS M: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> M: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>-- 2.7.4
I'm sorry but I think I have changed my mind on this. This has been spinning for a while and sometimes conclusions change over the time. I don't think that we really need a separate subsystem tag. I'd be for a new M-entry or R-entry to the existing subsystem tag. It's essential to have ack from someone with ARM and TEE knowledge but this way too heavy for the purpose. I also see it the most manageable if the trusted keys PR's come from a single source. /Jarkko