Commit dbbe7c96 authored by Jakub Kicinski's avatar Jakub Kicinski Committed by David S. Miller

docs: networking: drop special stable handling

Leave it to Greg.
Signed-off-by: default avatarJakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
parent 879c348c
...@@ -142,73 +142,13 @@ Please send incremental versions on top of what has been merged in order to fix ...@@ -142,73 +142,13 @@ Please send incremental versions on top of what has been merged in order to fix
the patches the way they would look like if your latest patch series was to be the patches the way they would look like if your latest patch series was to be
merged. merged.
How can I tell what patches are queued up for backporting to the various stable releases? Are there special rules regarding stable submissions on netdev?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normally Greg Kroah-Hartman collects stable commits himself, but for
networking, Dave collects up patches he deems critical for the
networking subsystem, and then hands them off to Greg.
There is a patchworks queue that you can see here:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/bundle/netdev/stable/?state=*
It contains the patches which Dave has selected, but not yet handed off
to Greg. If Greg already has the patch, then it will be here:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git
A quick way to find whether the patch is in this stable-queue is to
simply clone the repo, and then git grep the mainline commit ID, e.g.
::
stable-queue$ git grep -l 284041ef21fdf2e
releases/3.0.84/ipv6-fix-possible-crashes-in-ip6_cork_release.patch
releases/3.4.51/ipv6-fix-possible-crashes-in-ip6_cork_release.patch
releases/3.9.8/ipv6-fix-possible-crashes-in-ip6_cork_release.patch
stable/stable-queue$
I see a network patch and I think it should be backported to stable. Should I request it via stable@vger.kernel.org like the references in the kernel's Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst file say?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, not for networking. Check the stable queues as per above first
to see if it is already queued. If not, then send a mail to netdev,
listing the upstream commit ID and why you think it should be a stable
candidate.
Before you jump to go do the above, do note that the normal stable rules
in :ref:`Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst <stable_kernel_rules>`
still apply. So you need to explicitly indicate why it is a critical
fix and exactly what users are impacted. In addition, you need to
convince yourself that you *really* think it has been overlooked,
vs. having been considered and rejected.
Generally speaking, the longer it has had a chance to "soak" in
mainline, the better the odds that it is an OK candidate for stable. So
scrambling to request a commit be added the day after it appears should
be avoided.
I have created a network patch and I think it should be backported to stable. Should I add a Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org like the references in the kernel's Documentation/ directory say?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. See above answer. In short, if you think it really belongs in
stable, then ensure you write a decent commit log that describes who
gets impacted by the bug fix and how it manifests itself, and when the
bug was introduced. If you do that properly, then the commit will get
handled appropriately and most likely get put in the patchworks stable
queue if it really warrants it.
If you think there is some valid information relating to it being in
stable that does *not* belong in the commit log, then use the three dash
marker line as described in
:ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <the_canonical_patch_format>`
to temporarily embed that information into the patch that you send.
Are all networking bug fixes backported to all stable releases?
--------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------
Due to capacity, Dave could only take care of the backports for the While it used to be the case that netdev submissions were not supposed
last two stable releases. For earlier stable releases, each stable to carry explicit ``CC: stable@vger.kernel.org`` tags that is no longer
branch maintainer is supposed to take care of them. If you find any the case today. Please follow the standard stable rules in
patch is missing from an earlier stable branch, please notify :ref:`Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst <stable_kernel_rules>`,
stable@vger.kernel.org with either a commit ID or a formal patch and make sure you include appropriate Fixes tags!
backported, and CC Dave and other relevant networking developers.
Is the comment style convention different for the networking content? Is the comment style convention different for the networking content?
--------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
......
...@@ -35,12 +35,6 @@ Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the ...@@ -35,12 +35,6 @@ Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the
Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree 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.kernel.org/bundle/netdev/stable/?state=*
to ensure the requested patch is not already queued up.
- Security patches should not be handled (solely) by the -stable review - Security patches should not be handled (solely) by the -stable review
process but should follow the procedures in process but should follow the procedures in
:ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/security-bugs.rst <securitybugs>`. :ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/security-bugs.rst <securitybugs>`.
......
...@@ -250,11 +250,6 @@ should also read ...@@ -250,11 +250,6 @@ should also read
:ref:`Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst <stable_kernel_rules>` :ref:`Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst <stable_kernel_rules>`
in addition to this file. in addition to this file.
Note, however, that some subsystem maintainers want to come to their own
conclusions on which patches should go to the stable trees. The networking
maintainer, in particular, would rather not see individual developers
adding lines like the above to their patches.
If changes affect userland-kernel interfaces, please send the MAN-PAGES If changes affect userland-kernel interfaces, please send the MAN-PAGES
maintainer (as listed in the MAINTAINERS file) a man-pages patch, or at maintainer (as listed in the MAINTAINERS file) a man-pages patch, or at
least a notification of the change, so that some information makes its way least a notification of the change, so that some information makes its way
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment