Sashiko reviews for the LSM mailing list
Paul Moore
paul at paul-moore.com
Tue Jun 16 15:23:54 UTC 2026
On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 10:59 AM Mickaël Salaün <mic at digikod.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 10:11:42AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 4:49 AM Mickaël Salaün <mic at digikod.net> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2026 at 04:13:59PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2026 at 11:41 AM Mickaël Salaün <mic at digikod.net> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > I've been reading Sashiko's (AI bot) reviews wrt Landlock patches, and
> > > > > most of them were valuable. It found issues (security or not), but it
> > > > > requires to go to https://sashiko.dev to find them, which is too easy to
> > > > > forget, and requires additional work from maintainers to copy or point
> > > > > to these reviews. I sent a PR (currently in draft) to enable email
> > > > > replies from Sashiko to the Linux Security Module mailing list (most
> > > > > patches are already reviewed anyway):
> > > > > https://github.com/sashiko-dev/sashiko/pull/278
> > > > >
> > > > > Making such reviews broadly available can improve the quality of patches
> > > > > we receive without much noise, helping for all LSM-related code. We can
> > > > > fine tune some email-related settings if needed.
> > > > >
> > > > > If there are any concern or question, this is the right time to start a
> > > > > discussion.
> > > >
> > > > I recently enabled Sashiko for the SELinux list to trial it there
> > > > first, with the goal of eventually bringing this topic up for the rest
> > > > of the LSM folks on the LSM list.
> > > >
> > > > While I think Sashiko's review comments are generally okay, you should
> > > > have contacted the LSM mailing list folks *before* submitting a PR
> > > > that would cause an automated bot to send email to the LSM list (this
> > > > applies to all automated emails, not just LLM reviews). Please hold
> > > > the PR until you have given people a chance to comment on the issue.
> > >
> > > As I explained just above, the PR is a draft (GitHub specific state for
> > > WIP), so it cannot be merged as-is, but it is useful for reviews and for
> > > LSM folks to get a look if they are interested.
> > >
> > > > Personally, I'm okay with it.
> > >
> > > Looks good. What about waiting a week to get some feedback here and
> > > then ask for a merge of the PR?
> >
> > I would suggest enabling Sashiko for the LSM list, but not enabling
> > the email replies at first. This would allow people to view the
> > reviews and perhaps make a better informed decision.
>
> The point of this PR and the related discussion is to enable email
> replies ...
... and you've heard my opinions on that.
> the reviews are already there.
I don't believe the LSM list is being directly reviewed by sashiko.dev
at the moment (check the lists drop-down in the web UI). Any
LSM-posted patches being reviewed are being reviewed due to a CC to a
sashiko.dev monitored list.
> As explained, my motivation for
> this change is to get reviews, and without emails I suspect almost nobody
> (will) take a look and that would not even be an experiment. I'm saying
> that because I forgot several times to take a look and it adds more work
> to the review/maintenance.
I think it's important to allow people a chance to see what the
reviews are like before you enable an automated bot on the mailing
list. I'm sorry you found it cumbersome to check the web UI, but a
change to what is sent to the mailing list affects more than just you.
Perhaps we do eventually enable sashiko.dev to post to the LSM list,
as I said before I have no problem with that, but I want to give
people a chance to look at the Sashiko reviews first and make a more
informed decision.
> FWIW, there are currently 41 kernel mailing lists registered:
> https://github.com/sashiko-dev/sashiko/blob/main/sashiko.dev/email_policy.toml
Yes, I think we can all read a configuration file.
> > > Anyway, it would not be written in
> > > stone, we can update Sashiko config with new PRs.
> >
> > It is worth noting that sashiko.dev updates are not immediate, so
> > there is a delay between a PR being merged and it taking effect.
>
> Sure and I don't think it's an issue. It's really easy to filter
> emails on any MUA if really needed, and I'm sure the Sashiko maintainers
> would be able to fix things quickly if needed.
I think it's important to understand that not everyone approaches the
email lists the same way, and something that is a non-issue for you
might be a larger issue for someone else.
As a reminder, you are always welcome to create your own list for
Landlock if you find that the LSM list no longer meets your needs.
The only thing I ask is that any patches touching/affecting the LSM
framework are sent to the LSM list and of course any pull requests
sent to Linus should CC the LSM list.
--
paul-moore.com
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list