aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst')
-rw-r--r--Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst240
1 files changed, 152 insertions, 88 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
index 06f743b612c4..1704f1c686d0 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
@@ -6,144 +6,189 @@ Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux -stable releases
Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the
"-stable" tree:
+ - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree (upstream).
- It must be obviously correct and tested.
- It cannot be bigger than 100 lines, with context.
- - It must fix only one thing.
- - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a
- problem..." type thing).
- - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
- marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real
- security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short, something
- critical.
- - Serious issues as reported by a user of a distribution kernel may also
- be considered if they fix a notable performance or interactivity issue.
- As these fixes are not as obvious and have a higher risk of a subtle
- regression they should only be submitted by a distribution kernel
- maintainer and include an addendum linking to a bugzilla entry if it
- exists and additional information on the user-visible impact.
- - New device IDs and quirks are also accepted.
- - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how the
- race can be exploited is also provided.
- - It cannot contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
- whitespace cleanups, etc).
- It must follow the
:ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <submittingpatches>`
rules.
- - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree (upstream).
+ - It must either fix a real bug that bothers people or just add a device ID.
+ To elaborate on the former:
+
+ - It fixes a problem like an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real security
+ issue, a hardware quirk, a build error (but not for things marked
+ CONFIG_BROKEN), or some "oh, that's not good" issue.
+ - Serious issues as reported by a user of a distribution kernel may also
+ be considered if they fix a notable performance or interactivity issue.
+ As these fixes are not as obvious and have a higher risk of a subtle
+ regression they should only be submitted by a distribution kernel
+ maintainer and include an addendum linking to a bugzilla entry if it
+ exists and additional information on the user-visible impact.
+ - No "This could be a problem..." type of things like a "theoretical race
+ condition", unless an explanation of how the bug can be exploited is also
+ provided.
+ - No "trivial" fixes without benefit for users (spelling changes, whitespace
+ cleanups, etc).
Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree
----------------------------------------------------
- - If the patch covers files in net/ or drivers/net please follow netdev stable
- submission guidelines as described in
- :ref:`Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst <netdev-FAQ>`
- after first checking the stable networking queue at
- https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/bundle/davem/stable/?series=&submitter=&state=*&q=&archive=
- to ensure the requested patch is not already queued up.
- - Security patches should not be handled (solely) by the -stable review
+.. note::
+
+ Security patches should not be handled (solely) by the -stable review
process but should follow the procedures in
- :ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/security-bugs.rst <securitybugs>`.
+ :ref:`Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst <securitybugs>`.
+
+There are three options to submit a change to -stable trees:
+
+ 1. Add a 'stable tag' to the description of a patch you then submit for
+ mainline inclusion.
+ 2. Ask the stable team to pick up a patch already mainlined.
+ 3. Submit a patch to the stable team that is equivalent to a change already
+ mainlined.
-For all other submissions, choose one of the following procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------
+The sections below describe each of the options in more detail.
+
+:ref:`option_1` is **strongly** preferred, it is the easiest and most common.
+:ref:`option_2` is mainly meant for changes where backporting was not considered
+at the time of submission. :ref:`option_3` is an alternative to the two earlier
+options for cases where a mainlined patch needs adjustments to apply in older
+series (for example due to API changes).
+
+When using option 2 or 3 you can ask for your change to be included in specific
+stable series. When doing so, ensure the fix or an equivalent is applicable,
+submitted, or already present in all newer stable trees still supported. This is
+meant to prevent regressions that users might later encounter on updating, if
+e.g. a fix merged for 5.19-rc1 would be backported to 5.10.y, but not to 5.15.y.
.. _option_1:
Option 1
********
-To have the patch automatically included in the stable tree, add the tag
+To have a patch you submit for mainline inclusion later automatically picked up
+for stable trees, add the tag
.. code-block:: none
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
-in the sign-off area. Once the patch is merged it will be applied to
-the stable tree without anything else needing to be done by the author
-or subsystem maintainer.
+in the sign-off area. Once the patch is mainlined it will be applied to the
+stable tree without anything else needing to be done by the author or
+subsystem maintainer.
-.. _option_2:
+To sent additional instructions to the stable team, use a shell-style inline
+comment:
-Option 2
-********
+ * To specify any additional patch prerequisites for cherry picking use the
+ following format in the sign-off area:
-After the patch has been merged to Linus' tree, send an email to
-stable@vger.kernel.org containing the subject of the patch, the commit ID,
-why you think it should be applied, and what kernel version you wish it to
-be applied to.
+ .. code-block:: none
-.. _option_3:
+ Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: a1f84a3: sched: Check for idle
+ Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: 1b9508f: sched: Rate-limit newidle
+ Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: fd21073: sched: Fix affinity logic
+ Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x
+ Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
-Option 3
-********
+ The tag sequence has the meaning of:
-Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
-stable@vger.kernel.org. You must note the upstream commit ID in the
-changelog of your submission, as well as the kernel version you wish
-it to be applied to.
+ .. code-block:: none
-:ref:`option_1` is **strongly** preferred, is the easiest and most common.
-:ref:`option_2` and :ref:`option_3` are more useful if the patch isn't deemed
-worthy at the time it is applied to a public git tree (for instance, because
-it deserves more regression testing first). :ref:`option_3` is especially
-useful if the patch needs some special handling to apply to an older kernel
-(e.g., if API's have changed in the meantime).
+ git cherry-pick a1f84a3
+ git cherry-pick 1b9508f
+ git cherry-pick fd21073
+ git cherry-pick <this commit>
-Note that for :ref:`option_3`, if the patch deviates from the original
-upstream patch (for example because it had to be backported) this must be very
-clearly documented and justified in the patch description.
+ Note that for a patch series, you do not have to list as prerequisites the
+ patches present in the series itself. For example, if you have the following
+ patch series:
-The upstream commit ID must be specified with a separate line above the commit
-text, like this:
+ .. code-block:: none
-.. code-block:: none
+ patch1
+ patch2
- commit <sha1> upstream.
+ where patch2 depends on patch1, you do not have to list patch1 as
+ prerequisite of patch2 if you have already marked patch1 for stable
+ inclusion.
-Additionally, some patches submitted via :ref:`option_1` may have additional
-patch prerequisites which can be cherry-picked. This can be specified in the
-following format in the sign-off area:
+ * For patches that may have kernel version prerequisites specify them using
+ the following format in the sign-off area:
-.. code-block:: none
+ .. code-block:: none
- Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: a1f84a3: sched: Check for idle
- Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: 1b9508f: sched: Rate-limit newidle
- Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: fd21073: sched: Fix affinity logic
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x
- Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
-The tag sequence has the meaning of:
+ The tag has the meaning of:
-.. code-block:: none
+ .. code-block:: none
- git cherry-pick a1f84a3
- git cherry-pick 1b9508f
- git cherry-pick fd21073
git cherry-pick <this commit>
-Also, some patches may have kernel version prerequisites. This can be
-specified in the following format in the sign-off area:
+ For each "-stable" tree starting with the specified version.
+
+ Note, such tagging is unnecessary if the stable team can derive the
+ appropriate versions from Fixes: tags.
+
+ * To delay pick up of patches, use the following format:
+
+ .. code-block:: none
+
+ Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # after 4 weeks in mainline
+
+ * For any other requests, just add a note to the stable tag. This for example
+ can be used to point out known problems:
+
+ .. code-block:: none
+
+ Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # see patch description, needs adjustments for <= 6.3
+
+.. _option_2:
+
+Option 2
+********
+
+If the patch already has been merged to mainline, send an email to
+stable@vger.kernel.org containing the subject of the patch, the commit ID,
+why you think it should be applied, and what kernel versions you wish it to
+be applied to.
+
+.. _option_3:
+
+Option 3
+********
+
+Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
+stable@vger.kernel.org and mention the kernel versions you wish it to be applied
+to. When doing so, you must note the upstream commit ID in the changelog of your
+submission with a separate line above the commit text, like this:
.. code-block:: none
- Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x
+ commit <sha1> upstream.
-The tag has the meaning of:
+or alternatively:
.. code-block:: none
- git cherry-pick <this commit>
+ [ Upstream commit <sha1> ]
+
+If the submitted patch deviates from the original upstream patch (for example
+because it had to be adjusted for the older API), this must be very clearly
+documented and justified in the patch description.
+
-For each "-stable" tree starting with the specified version.
+Following the submission
+------------------------
-Following the submission:
+The sender will receive an ACK when the patch has been accepted into the
+queue, or a NAK if the patch is rejected. This response might take a few
+days, according to the schedules of the stable team members.
- - The sender will receive an ACK when the patch has been accepted into the
- queue, or a NAK if the patch is rejected. This response might take a few
- days, according to the developer's schedules.
- - If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review by
- other developers and by the relevant subsystem maintainer.
+If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review by other
+developers and by the relevant subsystem maintainer.
Review cycle
@@ -157,12 +202,22 @@ Review cycle
- If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel
members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers and
members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the queue.
- - At the end of the review cycle, the ACKed patches will be added to the
- latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen.
+ - The ACKed patches will be posted again as part of release candidate (-rc)
+ to be tested by developers and testers.
+ - Usually only one -rc release is made, however if there are any outstanding
+ issues, some patches may be modified or dropped or additional patches may
+ be queued. Additional -rc releases are then released and tested until no
+ issues are found.
+ - Responding to the -rc releases can be done on the mailing list by sending
+ a "Tested-by:" email with any testing information desired. The "Tested-by:"
+ tags will be collected and added to the release commit.
+ - At the end of the review cycle, the new -stable release will be released
+ containing all the queued and tested patches.
- Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from the
security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle.
Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure.
+
Trees
-----
@@ -174,7 +229,16 @@ Trees
- The finalized and tagged releases of all stable kernels can be found
in separate branches per version at:
- https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git
+ https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git
+
+ - The release candidate of all stable kernel versions can be found at:
+
+ https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git/
+
+ .. warning::
+ The -stable-rc tree is a snapshot in time of the stable-queue tree and
+ will change frequently, hence will be rebased often. It should only be
+ used for testing purposes (e.g. to be consumed by CI systems).
Review committee