kernel/common.git - Unnamed repository; edit this file 'description' to name the repository.

1 .. _stable_kernel_rules:
2
3 Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux -stable releases
4 ===============================================================
5
6 Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the
7 "-stable" tree:
8
9  - It must be obviously correct and tested.
10  - It cannot be bigger than 100 lines, with context.
11  - It must fix only one thing.
12  - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a
13    problem..." type thing).
14  - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
15    marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real
16    security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue.  In short, something
17    critical.
18  - Serious issues as reported by a user of a distribution kernel may also
19    be considered if they fix a notable performance or interactivity issue.
20    As these fixes are not as obvious and have a higher risk of a subtle
21    regression they should only be submitted by a distribution kernel
22    maintainer and include an addendum linking to a bugzilla entry if it
23    exists and additional information on the user-visible impact.
24  - New device IDs and quirks are also accepted.
25  - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how the
26    race can be exploited is also provided.
27  - It cannot contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
28    whitespace cleanups, etc).
29  - It must follow the
30    :ref:`Documentation/SubmittingPatches <submittingpatches>`
31    rules.
32  - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree (upstream).
33
34
35 Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree
36 ----------------------------------------------------
37
38  - If the patch covers files in net/ or drivers/net please follow netdev stable
39    submission guidelines as described in
40    Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt
41  - Security patches should not be handled (solely) by the -stable review
42    process but should follow the procedures in
43    :ref:`Documentation/SecurityBugs <securitybugs>`.
44
45 For all other submissions, choose one of the following procedures
46 -----------------------------------------------------------------
47
48 .. _option_1:
49
50 Option 1
51 ********
52
53 To have the patch automatically included in the stable tree, add the tag
54
55 .. code-block:: none
56
57      Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
58
59 in the sign-off area. Once the patch is merged it will be applied to
60 the stable tree without anything else needing to be done by the author
61 or subsystem maintainer.
62
63 .. _option_2:
64
65 Option 2
66 ********
67
68 After the patch has been merged to Linus' tree, send an email to
69 stable@vger.kernel.org containing the subject of the patch, the commit ID,
70 why you think it should be applied, and what kernel version you wish it to
71 be applied to.
72
73 .. _option_3:
74
75 Option 3
76 ********
77
78 Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
79 stable@vger.kernel.org.  You must note the upstream commit ID in the
80 changelog of your submission, as well as the kernel version you wish
81 it to be applied to.
82
83 :ref:`option_1` is **strongly** preferred, is the easiest and most common.
84 :ref:`option_2` and :ref:`option_3` are more useful if the patch isn't deemed
85 worthy at the time it is applied to a public git tree (for instance, because
86 it deserves more regression testing first).  :ref:`option_3` is especially
87 useful if the patch needs some special handling to apply to an older kernel
88 (e.g., if API's have changed in the meantime).
89
90 Note that for :ref:`option_3`, if the patch deviates from the original
91 upstream patch (for example because it had to be backported) this must be very
92 clearly documented and justified in the patch description.
93
94 The upstream commit ID must be specified with a separate line above the commit
95 text, like this:
96
97 .. code-block:: none
98
99     commit <sha1> upstream.
100
101 Additionally, some patches submitted via Option 1 may have additional patch
102 prerequisites which can be cherry-picked. This can be specified in the following
103 format in the sign-off area:
104
105 .. code-block:: none
106
107      Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: a1f84a3: sched: Check for idle
108      Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: 1b9508f: sched: Rate-limit newidle
109      Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: fd21073: sched: Fix affinity logic
110      Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x
111      Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
112
113 The tag sequence has the meaning of:
114
115 .. code-block:: none
116
117      git cherry-pick a1f84a3
118      git cherry-pick 1b9508f
119      git cherry-pick fd21073
120      git cherry-pick <this commit>
121
122 Also, some patches may have kernel version prerequisites.  This can be
123 specified in the following format in the sign-off area:
124
125 .. code-block:: none
126
127      Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x
128
129 The tag has the meaning of:
130
131 .. code-block:: none
132
133      git cherry-pick <this commit>
134
135 For each "-stable" tree starting with the specified version.
136
137 Following the submission:
138
139  - The sender will receive an ACK when the patch has been accepted into the
140    queue, or a NAK if the patch is rejected.  This response might take a few
141    days, according to the developer's schedules.
142  - If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review by
143    other developers and by the relevant subsystem maintainer.
144
145
146 Review cycle
147 ------------
148
149  - When the -stable maintainers decide for a review cycle, the patches will be
150    sent to the review committee, and the maintainer of the affected area of
151    the patch (unless the submitter is the maintainer of the area) and CC: to
152    the linux-kernel mailing list.
153  - The review committee has 48 hours in which to ACK or NAK the patch.
154  - If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel
155    members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers and
156    members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the queue.
157  - At the end of the review cycle, the ACKed patches will be added to the
158    latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen.
159  - Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from the
160    security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle.
161    Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure.
162
163 Trees
164 -----
165
166  - The queues of patches, for both completed versions and in progress
167    versions can be found at:
168
169 	http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git
170
171  - The finalized and tagged releases of all stable kernels can be found
172    in separate branches per version at:
173
174 	http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git
175
176
177 Review committee
178 ----------------
179
180  - This is made up of a number of kernel developers who have volunteered for
181    this task, and a few that haven't.
182
1	.. _stable_kernel_rules:
2
3	Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux -stable releases
4	===============================================================
5
6	Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the
7	"-stable" tree:
8
9	- It must be obviously correct and tested.
10	- It cannot be bigger than 100 lines, with context.
11	- It must fix only one thing.
12	- It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a
13	problem..." type thing).
14	- It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
15	marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real
16	security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short, something
17	critical.
18	- Serious issues as reported by a user of a distribution kernel may also
19	be considered if they fix a notable performance or interactivity issue.
20	As these fixes are not as obvious and have a higher risk of a subtle
21	regression they should only be submitted by a distribution kernel
22	maintainer and include an addendum linking to a bugzilla entry if it
23	exists and additional information on the user-visible impact.
24	- New device IDs and quirks are also accepted.
25	- No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how the
26	race can be exploited is also provided.
27	- It cannot contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
28	whitespace cleanups, etc).
29	- It must follow the
30	:ref:`Documentation/SubmittingPatches <submittingpatches>`
31	rules.
32	- It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree (upstream).
33
34
35	Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree
36	----------------------------------------------------
37
38	- If the patch covers files in net/ or drivers/net please follow netdev stable
39	submission guidelines as described in
40	Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt
41	- Security patches should not be handled (solely) by the -stable review
42	process but should follow the procedures in
43	:ref:`Documentation/SecurityBugs <securitybugs>`.
44
45	For all other submissions, choose one of the following procedures
46	-----------------------------------------------------------------
47
48	.. _option_1:
49
50	Option 1
51	********
52
53	To have the patch automatically included in the stable tree, add the tag
54
55	.. code-block:: none
56
57	Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
58
59	in the sign-off area. Once the patch is merged it will be applied to
60	the stable tree without anything else needing to be done by the author
61	or subsystem maintainer.
62
63	.. _option_2:
64
65	Option 2
66	********
67
68	After the patch has been merged to Linus' tree, send an email to
69	stable@vger.kernel.org containing the subject of the patch, the commit ID,
70	why you think it should be applied, and what kernel version you wish it to
71	be applied to.
72
73	.. _option_3:
74
75	Option 3
76	********
77
78	Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
79	stable@vger.kernel.org. You must note the upstream commit ID in the
80	changelog of your submission, as well as the kernel version you wish
81	it to be applied to.
82
83	:ref:`option_1` is strongly preferred, is the easiest and most common.
84	:ref:`option_2` and :ref:`option_3` are more useful if the patch isn't deemed
85	worthy at the time it is applied to a public git tree (for instance, because
86	it deserves more regression testing first). :ref:`option_3` is especially
87	useful if the patch needs some special handling to apply to an older kernel
88	(e.g., if API's have changed in the meantime).
89
90	Note that for :ref:`option_3`, if the patch deviates from the original
91	upstream patch (for example because it had to be backported) this must be very
92	clearly documented and justified in the patch description.
93
94	The upstream commit ID must be specified with a separate line above the commit
95	text, like this:
96
97	.. code-block:: none
98
99	commit <sha1> upstream.
100
101	Additionally, some patches submitted via Option 1 may have additional patch
102	prerequisites which can be cherry-picked. This can be specified in the following
103	format in the sign-off area:
104
105	.. code-block:: none
106
107	Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: a1f84a3: sched: Check for idle
108	Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: 1b9508f: sched: Rate-limit newidle
109	Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: fd21073: sched: Fix affinity logic
110	Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x
111	Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
112
113	The tag sequence has the meaning of:
114
115	.. code-block:: none
116
117	git cherry-pick a1f84a3
118	git cherry-pick 1b9508f
119	git cherry-pick fd21073
120	git cherry-pick <this commit>
121
122	Also, some patches may have kernel version prerequisites. This can be
123	specified in the following format in the sign-off area:
124
125	.. code-block:: none
126
127	Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x
128
129	The tag has the meaning of:
130
131	.. code-block:: none
132
133	git cherry-pick <this commit>
134
135	For each "-stable" tree starting with the specified version.
136
137	Following the submission:
138
139	- The sender will receive an ACK when the patch has been accepted into the
140	queue, or a NAK if the patch is rejected. This response might take a few
141	days, according to the developer's schedules.
142	- If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review by
143	other developers and by the relevant subsystem maintainer.
144
145
146	Review cycle
147	------------
148
149	- When the -stable maintainers decide for a review cycle, the patches will be
150	sent to the review committee, and the maintainer of the affected area of
151	the patch (unless the submitter is the maintainer of the area) and CC: to
152	the linux-kernel mailing list.
153	- The review committee has 48 hours in which to ACK or NAK the patch.
154	- If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel
155	members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers and
156	members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the queue.
157	- At the end of the review cycle, the ACKed patches will be added to the
158	latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen.
159	- Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from the
160	security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle.
161	Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure.
162
163	Trees
164	-----
165
166	- The queues of patches, for both completed versions and in progress
167	versions can be found at:
168
169	http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git
170
171	- The finalized and tagged releases of all stable kernels can be found
172	in separate branches per version at:
173
174	http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git
175
176
177	Review committee
178	----------------
179
180	- This is made up of a number of kernel developers who have volunteered for
181	this task, and a few that haven't.
182