Linux Audio

Check our new training course

Loading...
Note: File does not exist in v6.13.7.
  1
  2Information you need to know about netdev
  3-----------------------------------------
  4
  5Q: What is netdev?
  6
  7A: It is a mailing list for all network-related Linux stuff.  This includes
  8   anything found under net/  (i.e. core code like IPv6) and drivers/net
  9   (i.e. hardware specific drivers) in the Linux source tree.
 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
 14   The netdev list is managed (like many other Linux mailing lists) through
 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
 20   Aside from subsystems like that mentioned above, all network-related Linux
 21   development (i.e. RFC, review, comments, etc.) takes place on netdev.
 22
 23Q: How do the changes posted to netdev make their way into Linux?
 24
 25A: 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        https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net.git
 33        https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git
 34
 35Q: How often do changes from these trees make it to the mainline Linus tree?
 36
 37A: To understand this, you need to know a bit of background information
 38   on the cadence of Linux development.  Each new release starts off with
 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
 49   Relating that to netdev:  At the beginning of the 2-week merge window,
 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
 62   Shortly after the two weeks have passed (and vX.Y-rc1 is released), the
 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
 67   any new networking-related commits.  You may also check the following
 68   website for the current status:
 69
 70        http://vger.kernel.org/~davem/net-next.html
 71
 72   The "net" tree continues to collect fixes for the vX.Y content, and
 73   is fed back to Linus at regular (~weekly) intervals.  Meaning that the
 74   focus for "net" is on stabilization and bugfixes.
 75
 76   Finally, the vX.Y gets released, and the whole cycle starts over.
 77
 78Q: So where are we now in this cycle?
 79
 80A: Load the mainline (Linus) page here:
 81
 82	https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
 83
 84   and note the top of the "tags" section.  If it is rc1, it is early
 85   in the dev cycle.  If it was tagged rc7 a week ago, then a release
 86   is probably imminent.
 87
 88Q: How do I indicate which tree (net vs. net-next) my patch should be in?
 89
 90A: Firstly, think whether you have a bug fix or new "next-like" content.
 91   Then once decided, assuming that you use git, use the prefix flag, i.e.
 92
 93	git format-patch --subject-prefix='PATCH net-next' start..finish
 94
 95   Use "net" instead of "net-next" (always lower case) in the above for
 96   bug-fix net content.  If you don't use git, then note the only magic in
 97   the above is just the subject text of the outgoing e-mail, and you can
 98   manually change it yourself with whatever MUA you are comfortable with.
 99
100Q: I sent a patch and I'm wondering what happened to it.  How can I tell
101   whether it got merged?
102
103A: Start by looking at the main patchworks queue for netdev:
104
105	http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/list/
106
107   The "State" field will tell you exactly where things are at with
108   your patch.
109
110Q: The above only says "Under Review".  How can I find out more?
111
112A: Generally speaking, the patches get triaged quickly (in less than 48h).
113   So be patient.  Asking the maintainer for status updates on your
114   patch is a good way to ensure your patch is ignored or pushed to
115   the bottom of the priority list.
116
117Q: I submitted multiple versions of the patch series, should I directly update
118   patchwork for the previous versions of these patch series?
119
120A: No, please don't interfere with the patch status on patchwork, leave it to
121   the maintainer to figure out what is the most recent and current version that
122   should be applied. If there is any doubt, the maintainer will reply and ask
123   what should be done.
124
125Q: How can I tell what patches are queued up for backporting to the
126   various stable releases?
127
128A: Normally Greg Kroah-Hartman collects stable commits himself, but
129   for networking, Dave collects up patches he deems critical for the
130   networking subsystem, and then hands them off to Greg.
131
132   There is a patchworks queue that you can see here:
133	http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/bundle/davem/stable/?state=*
134
135   It contains the patches which Dave has selected, but not yet handed
136   off to Greg.  If Greg already has the patch, then it will be here:
137	https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git
138
139   A quick way to find whether the patch is in this stable-queue is
140   to simply clone the repo, and then git grep the mainline commit ID, e.g.
141
142	stable-queue$ git grep -l 284041ef21fdf2e
143	releases/3.0.84/ipv6-fix-possible-crashes-in-ip6_cork_release.patch
144	releases/3.4.51/ipv6-fix-possible-crashes-in-ip6_cork_release.patch
145	releases/3.9.8/ipv6-fix-possible-crashes-in-ip6_cork_release.patch
146	stable/stable-queue$
147
148Q: I see a network patch and I think it should be backported to stable.
149   Should I request it via "stable@vger.kernel.org" like the references in
150   the kernel's Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst file say?
151
152A: No, not for networking.  Check the stable queues as per above 1st to see
153   if it is already queued.  If not, then send a mail to netdev, listing
154   the upstream commit ID and why you think it should be a stable candidate.
155
156   Before you jump to go do the above, do note that the normal stable rules
157   in Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst still apply.  So you need to
158   explicitly indicate why it is a critical fix and exactly what users are
159   impacted.  In addition, you need to convince yourself that you _really_
160   think it has been overlooked, vs. having been considered and rejected.
161
162   Generally speaking, the longer it has had a chance to "soak" in mainline,
163   the better the odds that it is an OK candidate for stable.  So scrambling
164   to request a commit be added the day after it appears should be avoided.
165
166Q: I have created a network patch and I think it should be backported to
167   stable.  Should I add a "Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org" like the references
168   in the kernel's Documentation/ directory say?
169
170A: No.  See above answer.  In short, if you think it really belongs in
171   stable, then ensure you write a decent commit log that describes who
172   gets impacted by the bugfix and how it manifests itself, and when the
173   bug was introduced.  If you do that properly, then the commit will
174   get handled appropriately and most likely get put in the patchworks
175   stable queue if it really warrants it.
176
177   If you think there is some valid information relating to it being in
178   stable that does _not_ belong in the commit log, then use the three
179   dash marker line as described in Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst to
180   temporarily embed that information into the patch that you send.
181
182Q: Someone said that the comment style and coding convention is different
183   for the networking content.  Is this true?
184
185A: Yes, in a largely trivial way.  Instead of this:
186
187	/*
188	 * foobar blah blah blah
189	 * another line of text
190	 */
191
192   it is requested that you make it look like this:
193
194	/* foobar blah blah blah
195	 * another line of text
196	 */
197
198Q: I am working in existing code that has the former comment style and not the
199   latter.  Should I submit new code in the former style or the latter?
200
201A: Make it the latter style, so that eventually all code in the domain of
202   netdev is of this format.
203
204Q: I found a bug that might have possible security implications or similar.
205   Should I mail the main netdev maintainer off-list?
206
207A: No. The current netdev maintainer has consistently requested that people
208   use the mailing lists and not reach out directly.  If you aren't OK with
209   that, then perhaps consider mailing "security@kernel.org" or reading about
210   http://oss-security.openwall.org/wiki/mailing-lists/distros
211   as possible alternative mechanisms.
212
213Q: What level of testing is expected before I submit my change?
214
215A: If your changes are against net-next, the expectation is that you
216   have tested by layering your changes on top of net-next.  Ideally you
217   will have done run-time testing specific to your change, but at a
218   minimum, your changes should survive an "allyesconfig" and an
219   "allmodconfig" build without new warnings or failures.
220
221Q: Any other tips to help ensure my net/net-next patch gets OK'd?
222
223A: Attention to detail.  Re-read your own work as if you were the
224   reviewer.  You can start with using checkpatch.pl, perhaps even
225   with the "--strict" flag.  But do not be mindlessly robotic in
226   doing so.  If your change is a bug-fix, make sure your commit log
227   indicates the end-user visible symptom, the underlying reason as
228   to why it happens, and then if necessary, explain why the fix proposed
229   is the best way to get things done.   Don't mangle whitespace, and as
230   is common, don't mis-indent function arguments that span multiple lines.
231   If it is your first patch, mail it to yourself so you can test apply
232   it to an unpatched tree to confirm infrastructure didn't mangle it.
233
234   Finally, go back and read Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst to be
235   sure you are not repeating some common mistake documented there.