Commit | Line | Data |
---|---|---|
49dfe762 PG |
1 | |
2 | Information you need to know about netdev | |
3 | ----------------------------------------- | |
4 | ||
5 | Q: What is netdev? | |
6 | ||
ad86de80 | 7 | A: It is a mailing list for all network-related Linux stuff. This includes |
49dfe762 | 8 | anything found under net/ (i.e. core code like IPv6) and drivers/net |
ad86de80 | 9 | (i.e. hardware specific drivers) in the Linux source tree. |
49dfe762 PG |
10 | |
11 | Note that some subsystems (e.g. wireless drivers) which have a high volume | |
12 | of traffic have their own specific mailing lists. | |
13 | ||
ad86de80 | 14 | The netdev list is managed (like many other Linux mailing lists) through |
49dfe762 PG |
15 | VGER ( http://vger.kernel.org/ ) and archives can be found below: |
16 | ||
17 | http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev | |
18 | http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/ | |
19 | ||
ad86de80 RD |
20 | Aside from subsystems like that mentioned above, all network-related Linux |
21 | development (i.e. RFC, review, comments, etc.) takes place on netdev. | |
49dfe762 | 22 | |
ad86de80 | 23 | Q: How do the changes posted to netdev make their way into Linux? |
49dfe762 PG |
24 | |
25 | A: There are always two trees (git repositories) in play. Both are driven | |
26 | by David Miller, the main network maintainer. There is the "net" tree, | |
27 | and the "net-next" tree. As you can probably guess from the names, the | |
28 | net tree is for fixes to existing code already in the mainline tree from | |
29 | Linus, and net-next is where the new code goes for the future release. | |
30 | You can find the trees here: | |
31 | ||
32 | http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/davem/net.git | |
33 | http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git | |
34 | ||
35 | Q: How often do changes from these trees make it to the mainline Linus tree? | |
36 | ||
37 | A: To understand this, you need to know a bit of background information | |
ad86de80 | 38 | on the cadence of Linux development. Each new release starts off with |
49dfe762 PG |
39 | a two week "merge window" where the main maintainers feed their new |
40 | stuff to Linus for merging into the mainline tree. After the two weeks, | |
41 | the merge window is closed, and it is called/tagged "-rc1". No new | |
42 | features get mainlined after this -- only fixes to the rc1 content | |
43 | are expected. After roughly a week of collecting fixes to the rc1 | |
44 | content, rc2 is released. This repeats on a roughly weekly basis | |
45 | until rc7 (typically; sometimes rc6 if things are quiet, or rc8 if | |
46 | things are in a state of churn), and a week after the last vX.Y-rcN | |
47 | was done, the official "vX.Y" is released. | |
48 | ||
ad86de80 | 49 | Relating that to netdev: At the beginning of the 2-week merge window, |
49dfe762 PG |
50 | the net-next tree will be closed - no new changes/features. The |
51 | accumulated new content of the past ~10 weeks will be passed onto | |
52 | mainline/Linus via a pull request for vX.Y -- at the same time, | |
53 | the "net" tree will start accumulating fixes for this pulled content | |
54 | relating to vX.Y | |
55 | ||
56 | An announcement indicating when net-next has been closed is usually | |
57 | sent to netdev, but knowing the above, you can predict that in advance. | |
58 | ||
59 | IMPORTANT: Do not send new net-next content to netdev during the | |
60 | period during which net-next tree is closed. | |
61 | ||
ad86de80 | 62 | Shortly after the two weeks have passed (and vX.Y-rc1 is released), the |
49dfe762 PG |
63 | tree for net-next reopens to collect content for the next (vX.Y+1) release. |
64 | ||
65 | If you aren't subscribed to netdev and/or are simply unsure if net-next | |
66 | has re-opened yet, simply check the net-next git repository link above for | |
ad86de80 | 67 | any new networking-related commits. |
49dfe762 PG |
68 | |
69 | The "net" tree continues to collect fixes for the vX.Y content, and | |
70 | is fed back to Linus at regular (~weekly) intervals. Meaning that the | |
c17cb8b5 | 71 | focus for "net" is on stabilization and bugfixes. |
49dfe762 PG |
72 | |
73 | Finally, the vX.Y gets released, and the whole cycle starts over. | |
74 | ||
75 | Q: So where are we now in this cycle? | |
76 | ||
77 | A: Load the mainline (Linus) page here: | |
78 | ||
79 | http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git | |
80 | ||
81 | and note the top of the "tags" section. If it is rc1, it is early | |
82 | in the dev cycle. If it was tagged rc7 a week ago, then a release | |
83 | is probably imminent. | |
84 | ||
85 | Q: How do I indicate which tree (net vs. net-next) my patch should be in? | |
86 | ||
87 | A: Firstly, think whether you have a bug fix or new "next-like" content. | |
88 | Then once decided, assuming that you use git, use the prefix flag, i.e. | |
89 | ||
90 | git format-patch --subject-prefix='PATCH net-next' start..finish | |
91 | ||
92 | Use "net" instead of "net-next" (always lower case) in the above for | |
93 | bug-fix net content. If you don't use git, then note the only magic in | |
94 | the above is just the subject text of the outgoing e-mail, and you can | |
95 | manually change it yourself with whatever MUA you are comfortable with. | |
96 | ||
97 | Q: I sent a patch and I'm wondering what happened to it. How can I tell | |
98 | whether it got merged? | |
99 | ||
100 | A: Start by looking at the main patchworks queue for netdev: | |
101 | ||
102 | http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/list/ | |
103 | ||
104 | The "State" field will tell you exactly where things are at with | |
105 | your patch. | |
106 | ||
107 | Q: The above only says "Under Review". How can I find out more? | |
108 | ||
109 | A: Generally speaking, the patches get triaged quickly (in less than 48h). | |
110 | So be patient. Asking the maintainer for status updates on your | |
111 | patch is a good way to ensure your patch is ignored or pushed to | |
112 | the bottom of the priority list. | |
113 | ||
114 | Q: How can I tell what patches are queued up for backporting to the | |
115 | various stable releases? | |
116 | ||
117 | A: Normally Greg Kroah-Hartman collects stable commits himself, but | |
118 | for networking, Dave collects up patches he deems critical for the | |
119 | networking subsystem, and then hands them off to Greg. | |
120 | ||
121 | There is a patchworks queue that you can see here: | |
122 | http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/bundle/davem/stable/?state=* | |
123 | ||
124 | It contains the patches which Dave has selected, but not yet handed | |
125 | off to Greg. If Greg already has the patch, then it will be here: | |
126 | http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git | |
127 | ||
128 | A quick way to find whether the patch is in this stable-queue is | |
129 | to simply clone the repo, and then git grep the mainline commit ID, e.g. | |
130 | ||
131 | stable-queue$ git grep -l 284041ef21fdf2e | |
132 | releases/3.0.84/ipv6-fix-possible-crashes-in-ip6_cork_release.patch | |
133 | releases/3.4.51/ipv6-fix-possible-crashes-in-ip6_cork_release.patch | |
134 | releases/3.9.8/ipv6-fix-possible-crashes-in-ip6_cork_release.patch | |
135 | stable/stable-queue$ | |
136 | ||
137 | Q: I see a network patch and I think it should be backported to stable. | |
138 | Should I request it via "stable@vger.kernel.org" like the references in | |
139 | the kernel's Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt file say? | |
140 | ||
141 | A: No, not for networking. Check the stable queues as per above 1st to see | |
142 | if it is already queued. If not, then send a mail to netdev, listing | |
143 | the upstream commit ID and why you think it should be a stable candidate. | |
144 | ||
145 | Before you jump to go do the above, do note that the normal stable rules | |
146 | in Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt still apply. So you need to | |
147 | explicitly indicate why it is a critical fix and exactly what users are | |
148 | impacted. In addition, you need to convince yourself that you _really_ | |
149 | think it has been overlooked, vs. having been considered and rejected. | |
150 | ||
151 | Generally speaking, the longer it has had a chance to "soak" in mainline, | |
152 | the better the odds that it is an OK candidate for stable. So scrambling | |
153 | to request a commit be added the day after it appears should be avoided. | |
154 | ||
155 | Q: I have created a network patch and I think it should be backported to | |
156 | stable. Should I add a "Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org" like the references | |
157 | in the kernel's Documentation/ directory say? | |
158 | ||
159 | A: No. See above answer. In short, if you think it really belongs in | |
160 | stable, then ensure you write a decent commit log that describes who | |
161 | gets impacted by the bugfix and how it manifests itself, and when the | |
162 | bug was introduced. If you do that properly, then the commit will | |
163 | get handled appropriately and most likely get put in the patchworks | |
164 | stable queue if it really warrants it. | |
165 | ||
166 | If you think there is some valid information relating to it being in | |
167 | stable that does _not_ belong in the commit log, then use the three | |
168 | dash marker line as described in Documentation/SubmittingPatches to | |
169 | temporarily embed that information into the patch that you send. | |
170 | ||
171 | Q: Someone said that the comment style and coding convention is different | |
172 | for the networking content. Is this true? | |
173 | ||
174 | A: Yes, in a largely trivial way. Instead of this: | |
175 | ||
176 | /* | |
177 | * foobar blah blah blah | |
178 | * another line of text | |
179 | */ | |
180 | ||
181 | it is requested that you make it look like this: | |
182 | ||
183 | /* foobar blah blah blah | |
184 | * another line of text | |
185 | */ | |
186 | ||
187 | Q: I am working in existing code that has the former comment style and not the | |
188 | latter. Should I submit new code in the former style or the latter? | |
189 | ||
190 | A: Make it the latter style, so that eventually all code in the domain of | |
191 | netdev is of this format. | |
192 | ||
193 | Q: I found a bug that might have possible security implications or similar. | |
194 | Should I mail the main netdev maintainer off-list? | |
195 | ||
196 | A: No. The current netdev maintainer has consistently requested that people | |
197 | use the mailing lists and not reach out directly. If you aren't OK with | |
198 | that, then perhaps consider mailing "security@kernel.org" or reading about | |
199 | http://oss-security.openwall.org/wiki/mailing-lists/distros | |
200 | as possible alternative mechanisms. | |
201 | ||
202 | Q: What level of testing is expected before I submit my change? | |
203 | ||
204 | A: If your changes are against net-next, the expectation is that you | |
205 | have tested by layering your changes on top of net-next. Ideally you | |
206 | will have done run-time testing specific to your change, but at a | |
207 | minimum, your changes should survive an "allyesconfig" and an | |
208 | "allmodconfig" build without new warnings or failures. | |
209 | ||
210 | Q: Any other tips to help ensure my net/net-next patch gets OK'd? | |
211 | ||
212 | A: Attention to detail. Re-read your own work as if you were the | |
213 | reviewer. You can start with using checkpatch.pl, perhaps even | |
214 | with the "--strict" flag. But do not be mindlessly robotic in | |
215 | doing so. If your change is a bug-fix, make sure your commit log | |
216 | indicates the end-user visible symptom, the underlying reason as | |
217 | to why it happens, and then if necessary, explain why the fix proposed | |
218 | is the best way to get things done. Don't mangle whitespace, and as | |
219 | is common, don't mis-indent function arguments that span multiple lines. | |
ad86de80 | 220 | If it is your first patch, mail it to yourself so you can test apply |
49dfe762 PG |
221 | it to an unpatched tree to confirm infrastructure didn't mangle it. |
222 | ||
223 | Finally, go back and read Documentation/SubmittingPatches to be | |
224 | sure you are not repeating some common mistake documented there. |