Skip to content

Commit 96398dd

Browse files
tchardingdavem330
authored andcommitted
docs: net: Convert netdev-FAQ to restructured text
Preferred kernel docs format is now restructured text. Convert netdev-FAQ.txt to restructured text. - Add SPDX license identifier. - Change file heading 'Information you need to know about netdev' to 'netdev FAQ' to better suit displayed index (in HTML). - Change question/answer layout to suit rst. Copy format in Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst - Fix indentation of code snippets - If multiple consecutive URLs appear put them in a list (to maintain whitespace). - Use uniform spelling of 'bug fix' throughout document (not bugfix or bug-fix). - Add double back ticks to 'net' and 'net-next' when referring to the trees. - Use rst references for Documentation/ links. - Add rst label 'netdev-FAQ' for referencing by other docs files. - Remove stale entry from Documentation/networking/00-INDEX Signed-off-by: Tobin C. Harding <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>
1 parent f58252c commit 96398dd

File tree

4 files changed

+260
-246
lines changed

4 files changed

+260
-246
lines changed

Documentation/networking/00-INDEX

Lines changed: 0 additions & 2 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -138,8 +138,6 @@ multiqueue.txt
138138
- HOWTO for multiqueue network device support.
139139
netconsole.txt
140140
- The network console module netconsole.ko: configuration and notes.
141-
netdev-FAQ.txt
142-
- FAQ describing how to submit net changes to netdev mailing list.
143141
netdev-features.txt
144142
- Network interface features API description.
145143
netdevices.txt

Documentation/networking/index.rst

Lines changed: 1 addition & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ Contents:
66
.. toctree::
77
:maxdepth: 2
88

9+
netdev-FAQ
910
af_xdp
1011
batman-adv
1112
can
Lines changed: 259 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,259 @@
1+
.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
2+
3+
.. _netdev-FAQ:
4+
5+
==========
6+
netdev FAQ
7+
==========
8+
9+
Q: What is netdev?
10+
------------------
11+
A: It is a mailing list for all network-related Linux stuff. This
12+
includes anything found under net/ (i.e. core code like IPv6) and
13+
drivers/net (i.e. hardware specific drivers) in the Linux source tree.
14+
15+
Note that some subsystems (e.g. wireless drivers) which have a high
16+
volume of traffic have their own specific mailing lists.
17+
18+
The netdev list is managed (like many other Linux mailing lists) through
19+
VGER (http://vger.kernel.org/) and archives can be found below:
20+
21+
- http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev
22+
- http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/
23+
24+
Aside from subsystems like that mentioned above, all network-related
25+
Linux development (i.e. RFC, review, comments, etc.) takes place on
26+
netdev.
27+
28+
Q: How do the changes posted to netdev make their way into Linux?
29+
-----------------------------------------------------------------
30+
A: There are always two trees (git repositories) in play. Both are
31+
driven by David Miller, the main network maintainer. There is the
32+
``net`` tree, and the ``net-next`` tree. As you can probably guess from
33+
the names, the ``net`` tree is for fixes to existing code already in the
34+
mainline tree from Linus, and ``net-next`` is where the new code goes
35+
for the future release. You can find the trees here:
36+
37+
- https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net.git
38+
- https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git
39+
40+
Q: How often do changes from these trees make it to the mainline Linus tree?
41+
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
42+
A: To understand this, you need to know a bit of background information on
43+
the cadence of Linux development. Each new release starts off with a
44+
two week "merge window" where the main maintainers feed their new stuff
45+
to Linus for merging into the mainline tree. After the two weeks, the
46+
merge window is closed, and it is called/tagged ``-rc1``. No new
47+
features get mainlined after this -- only fixes to the rc1 content are
48+
expected. After roughly a week of collecting fixes to the rc1 content,
49+
rc2 is released. This repeats on a roughly weekly basis until rc7
50+
(typically; sometimes rc6 if things are quiet, or rc8 if things are in a
51+
state of churn), and a week after the last vX.Y-rcN was done, the
52+
official vX.Y is released.
53+
54+
Relating that to netdev: At the beginning of the 2-week merge window,
55+
the ``net-next`` tree will be closed - no new changes/features. The
56+
accumulated new content of the past ~10 weeks will be passed onto
57+
mainline/Linus via a pull request for vX.Y -- at the same time, the
58+
``net`` tree will start accumulating fixes for this pulled content
59+
relating to vX.Y
60+
61+
An announcement indicating when ``net-next`` has been closed is usually
62+
sent to netdev, but knowing the above, you can predict that in advance.
63+
64+
IMPORTANT: Do not send new ``net-next`` content to netdev during the
65+
period during which ``net-next`` tree is closed.
66+
67+
Shortly after the two weeks have passed (and vX.Y-rc1 is released), the
68+
tree for ``net-next`` reopens to collect content for the next (vX.Y+1)
69+
release.
70+
71+
If you aren't subscribed to netdev and/or are simply unsure if
72+
``net-next`` has re-opened yet, simply check the ``net-next`` git
73+
repository link above for any new networking-related commits. You may
74+
also check the following website for the current status:
75+
76+
http://vger.kernel.org/~davem/net-next.html
77+
78+
The ``net`` tree continues to collect fixes for the vX.Y content, and is
79+
fed back to Linus at regular (~weekly) intervals. Meaning that the
80+
focus for ``net`` is on stabilization and bug fixes.
81+
82+
Finally, the vX.Y gets released, and the whole cycle starts over.
83+
84+
Q: So where are we now in this cycle?
85+
86+
Load the mainline (Linus) page here:
87+
88+
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
89+
90+
and note the top of the "tags" section. If it is rc1, it is early in
91+
the dev cycle. If it was tagged rc7 a week ago, then a release is
92+
probably imminent.
93+
94+
Q: How do I indicate which tree (net vs. net-next) my patch should be in?
95+
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
96+
A: Firstly, think whether you have a bug fix or new "next-like" content.
97+
Then once decided, assuming that you use git, use the prefix flag, i.e.
98+
::
99+
100+
git format-patch --subject-prefix='PATCH net-next' start..finish
101+
102+
Use ``net`` instead of ``net-next`` (always lower case) in the above for
103+
bug-fix ``net`` content. If you don't use git, then note the only magic
104+
in the above is just the subject text of the outgoing e-mail, and you
105+
can manually change it yourself with whatever MUA you are comfortable
106+
with.
107+
108+
Q: I sent a patch and I'm wondering what happened to it?
109+
--------------------------------------------------------
110+
Q: How can I tell whether it got merged?
111+
A: Start by looking at the main patchworks queue for netdev:
112+
113+
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/list/
114+
115+
The "State" field will tell you exactly where things are at with your
116+
patch.
117+
118+
Q: The above only says "Under Review". How can I find out more?
119+
----------------------------------------------------------------
120+
A: Generally speaking, the patches get triaged quickly (in less than
121+
48h). So be patient. Asking the maintainer for status updates on your
122+
patch is a good way to ensure your patch is ignored or pushed to the
123+
bottom of the priority list.
124+
125+
Q: I submitted multiple versions of the patch series
126+
----------------------------------------------------
127+
Q: should I directly update patchwork for the previous versions of these
128+
patch series?
129+
A: No, please don't interfere with the patch status on patchwork, leave
130+
it to the maintainer to figure out what is the most recent and current
131+
version that should be applied. If there is any doubt, the maintainer
132+
will reply and ask what should be done.
133+
134+
Q: How can I tell what patches are queued up for backporting to the various stable releases?
135+
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
136+
A: Normally Greg Kroah-Hartman collects stable commits himself, but for
137+
networking, Dave collects up patches he deems critical for the
138+
networking subsystem, and then hands them off to Greg.
139+
140+
There is a patchworks queue that you can see here:
141+
142+
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/bundle/davem/stable/?state=*
143+
144+
It contains the patches which Dave has selected, but not yet handed off
145+
to Greg. If Greg already has the patch, then it will be here:
146+
147+
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git
148+
149+
A quick way to find whether the patch is in this stable-queue is to
150+
simply clone the repo, and then git grep the mainline commit ID, e.g.
151+
::
152+
153+
stable-queue$ git grep -l 284041ef21fdf2e
154+
releases/3.0.84/ipv6-fix-possible-crashes-in-ip6_cork_release.patch
155+
releases/3.4.51/ipv6-fix-possible-crashes-in-ip6_cork_release.patch
156+
releases/3.9.8/ipv6-fix-possible-crashes-in-ip6_cork_release.patch
157+
stable/stable-queue$
158+
159+
Q: I see a network patch and I think it should be backported to stable.
160+
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
161+
Q: Should I request it via [email protected] like the references in
162+
the kernel's Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst file say?
163+
A: No, not for networking. Check the stable queues as per above first
164+
to see if it is already queued. If not, then send a mail to netdev,
165+
listing the upstream commit ID and why you think it should be a stable
166+
candidate.
167+
168+
Before you jump to go do the above, do note that the normal stable rules
169+
in :ref:`Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst <stable_kernel_rules>`
170+
still apply. So you need to explicitly indicate why it is a critical
171+
fix and exactly what users are impacted. In addition, you need to
172+
convince yourself that you *really* think it has been overlooked,
173+
vs. having been considered and rejected.
174+
175+
Generally speaking, the longer it has had a chance to "soak" in
176+
mainline, the better the odds that it is an OK candidate for stable. So
177+
scrambling to request a commit be added the day after it appears should
178+
be avoided.
179+
180+
Q: I have created a network patch and I think it should be backported to stable.
181+
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
182+
Q: Should I add a Cc: [email protected] like the references in the
183+
kernel's Documentation/ directory say?
184+
A: No. See above answer. In short, if you think it really belongs in
185+
stable, then ensure you write a decent commit log that describes who
186+
gets impacted by the bug fix and how it manifests itself, and when the
187+
bug was introduced. If you do that properly, then the commit will get
188+
handled appropriately and most likely get put in the patchworks stable
189+
queue if it really warrants it.
190+
191+
If you think there is some valid information relating to it being in
192+
stable that does *not* belong in the commit log, then use the three dash
193+
marker line as described in
194+
:ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <the_canonical_patch_format>`
195+
to temporarily embed that information into the patch that you send.
196+
197+
Q: Are all networking bug fixes backported to all stable releases?
198+
------------------------------------------------------------------
199+
A: Due to capacity, Dave could only take care of the backports for the
200+
last two stable releases. For earlier stable releases, each stable
201+
branch maintainer is supposed to take care of them. If you find any
202+
patch is missing from an earlier stable branch, please notify
203+
[email protected] with either a commit ID or a formal patch
204+
backported, and CC Dave and other relevant networking developers.
205+
206+
Q: Is the comment style convention different for the networking content?
207+
------------------------------------------------------------------------
208+
A: Yes, in a largely trivial way. Instead of this::
209+
210+
/*
211+
* foobar blah blah blah
212+
* another line of text
213+
*/
214+
215+
it is requested that you make it look like this::
216+
217+
/* foobar blah blah blah
218+
* another line of text
219+
*/
220+
221+
Q: I am working in existing code that has the former comment style and not the latter.
222+
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
223+
Q: Should I submit new code in the former style or the latter?
224+
A: Make it the latter style, so that eventually all code in the domain
225+
of netdev is of this format.
226+
227+
Q: I found a bug that might have possible security implications or similar.
228+
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
229+
Q: Should I mail the main netdev maintainer off-list?**
230+
A: No. The current netdev maintainer has consistently requested that
231+
people use the mailing lists and not reach out directly. If you aren't
232+
OK with that, then perhaps consider mailing [email protected] or
233+
reading about http://oss-security.openwall.org/wiki/mailing-lists/distros
234+
as possible alternative mechanisms.
235+
236+
Q: What level of testing is expected before I submit my change?
237+
---------------------------------------------------------------
238+
A: If your changes are against ``net-next``, the expectation is that you
239+
have tested by layering your changes on top of ``net-next``. Ideally
240+
you will have done run-time testing specific to your change, but at a
241+
minimum, your changes should survive an ``allyesconfig`` and an
242+
``allmodconfig`` build without new warnings or failures.
243+
244+
Q: Any other tips to help ensure my net/net-next patch gets OK'd?
245+
-----------------------------------------------------------------
246+
A: Attention to detail. Re-read your own work as if you were the
247+
reviewer. You can start with using ``checkpatch.pl``, perhaps even with
248+
the ``--strict`` flag. But do not be mindlessly robotic in doing so.
249+
If your change is a bug fix, make sure your commit log indicates the
250+
end-user visible symptom, the underlying reason as to why it happens,
251+
and then if necessary, explain why the fix proposed is the best way to
252+
get things done. Don't mangle whitespace, and as is common, don't
253+
mis-indent function arguments that span multiple lines. If it is your
254+
first patch, mail it to yourself so you can test apply it to an
255+
unpatched tree to confirm infrastructure didn't mangle it.
256+
257+
Finally, go back and read
258+
:ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <submittingpatches>`
259+
to be sure you are not repeating some common mistake documented there.

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)