On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 9:53 PM Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 12:24 PM KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > From: KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Similar to XDP and some JITs, also added Brendan and Florent who have > > been reviewing all my patches internally as reviewers. The patches are > > still expected to go via the BPF tree / list / merge workflows. > > > > Signed-off-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > MAINTAINERS | 11 +++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > > index af9f6a3ab100..09c902bee5d2 100644 > > --- a/MAINTAINERS > > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > > @@ -3366,6 +3366,17 @@ S: Supported > > F: arch/x86/net/ > > X: arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c > > > > +BPF LSM (Security Audit and Enforcement using eBPF) > > +M: KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > +R: Florent Revest <revest@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > +R: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > +L: bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > +S: Maintained > > +F: Documentation/bpf/bpf_lsm.rst > > +F: include/linux/bpf_lsm.h > > +F: kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c > > +F: security/bpf/ > > I'm not sure what's the value of the additional entry. I think it's better to add Brendan and Florent as reviewers for the LSM bits but not the overall BPF stuff (for now). We can also keep any tools/bpf stuff we add for LSM (at least initially) listed here. > bpf has many different components. This is just one of them. > Your maintainer of bpf_lsm responsibilities stay the same > regardless of the entry in the file. I do understand this does not entail any change in responsibilities
