mirror of
https://github.com/torvalds/linux.git
synced 2024-11-21 19:41:42 +00:00
docs: remove the tips on how to submit patches from MAINTAINERS
Having "how to submit patches" in MAINTAINTERS seems out of place. We have a whole section of documentation about it, duplication is harmful and a lot of the text looks really out of date. Sections 1, 2 and 4 look really, really old and not applicable to the modern process. Section 3 is obvious but also we have build bots now. Section 5 is a bit outdated (diff -u?!). But I like the part about factoring out shared code, so add that to process docs. Section 6 is unnecessary? Section 7 is covered by more appropriate docs. Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> Message-ID: <20230630171550.128296-1-kuba@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
c398488dab
commit
b45d8f3871
@ -51,6 +51,13 @@ mind:
|
|||||||
working toward the creation of the best kernel they can; they are not
|
working toward the creation of the best kernel they can; they are not
|
||||||
trying to create discomfort for their employers' competitors.
|
trying to create discomfort for their employers' competitors.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
- Be prepared for seemingly silly requests for coding style changes
|
||||||
|
and requests to factor out some of your code to shared parts of
|
||||||
|
the kernel. One job the maintainers do is to keep things looking
|
||||||
|
the same. Sometimes this means that the clever hack in your driver
|
||||||
|
to get around a problem actually needs to become a generalized
|
||||||
|
kernel feature ready for next time.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
What all of this comes down to is that, when reviewers send you comments,
|
What all of this comes down to is that, when reviewers send you comments,
|
||||||
you need to pay attention to the technical observations that they are
|
you need to pay attention to the technical observations that they are
|
||||||
making. Do not let their form of expression or your own pride keep that
|
making. Do not let their form of expression or your own pride keep that
|
||||||
|
80
MAINTAINERS
80
MAINTAINERS
@ -1,81 +1,5 @@
|
|||||||
List of maintainers and how to submit kernel changes
|
List of maintainers
|
||||||
====================================================
|
===================
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Please try to follow the guidelines below. This will make things
|
|
||||||
easier on the maintainers. Not all of these guidelines matter for every
|
|
||||||
trivial patch so apply some common sense.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Tips for patch submitters
|
|
||||||
-------------------------
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
1. Always *test* your changes, however small, on at least 4 or
|
|
||||||
5 people, preferably many more.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
2. Try to release a few ALPHA test versions to the net. Announce
|
|
||||||
them onto the kernel channel and await results. This is especially
|
|
||||||
important for device drivers, because often that's the only way
|
|
||||||
you will find things like the fact version 3 firmware needs
|
|
||||||
a magic fix you didn't know about, or some clown changed the
|
|
||||||
chips on a board and not its name. (Don't laugh! Look at the
|
|
||||||
SMC etherpower for that.)
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
3. Make sure your changes compile correctly in multiple
|
|
||||||
configurations. In particular check that changes work both as a
|
|
||||||
module and built into the kernel.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
4. When you are happy with a change make it generally available for
|
|
||||||
testing and await feedback.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
5. Make a patch available to the relevant maintainer in the list. Use
|
|
||||||
``diff -u`` to make the patch easy to merge. Be prepared to get your
|
|
||||||
changes sent back with seemingly silly requests about formatting
|
|
||||||
and variable names. These aren't as silly as they seem. One
|
|
||||||
job the maintainers (and especially Linus) do is to keep things
|
|
||||||
looking the same. Sometimes this means that the clever hack in
|
|
||||||
your driver to get around a problem actually needs to become a
|
|
||||||
generalized kernel feature ready for next time.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
PLEASE check your patch with the automated style checker
|
|
||||||
(scripts/checkpatch.pl) to catch trivial style violations.
|
|
||||||
See Documentation/process/coding-style.rst for guidance here.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
PLEASE CC: the maintainers and mailing lists that are generated
|
|
||||||
by ``scripts/get_maintainer.pl.`` The results returned by the
|
|
||||||
script will be best if you have git installed and are making
|
|
||||||
your changes in a branch derived from Linus' latest git tree.
|
|
||||||
See Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for details.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
PLEASE try to include any credit lines you want added with the
|
|
||||||
patch. It avoids people being missed off by mistake and makes
|
|
||||||
it easier to know who wants adding and who doesn't.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
PLEASE document known bugs. If it doesn't work for everything
|
|
||||||
or does something very odd once a month document it.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
PLEASE remember that submissions must be made under the terms
|
|
||||||
of the Linux Foundation certificate of contribution and should
|
|
||||||
include a Signed-off-by: line. The current version of this
|
|
||||||
"Developer's Certificate of Origin" (DCO) is listed in the file
|
|
||||||
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
6. Make sure you have the right to send any changes you make. If you
|
|
||||||
do changes at work you may find your employer owns the patch
|
|
||||||
not you.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
7. When sending security related changes or reports to a maintainer
|
|
||||||
please Cc: security@kernel.org, especially if the maintainer
|
|
||||||
does not respond. Please keep in mind that the security team is
|
|
||||||
a small set of people who can be efficient only when working on
|
|
||||||
verified bugs. Please only Cc: this list when you have identified
|
|
||||||
that the bug would present a short-term risk to other users if it
|
|
||||||
were publicly disclosed. For example, reports of address leaks do
|
|
||||||
not represent an immediate threat and are better handled publicly,
|
|
||||||
and ideally, should come with a patch proposal. Please do not send
|
|
||||||
automated reports to this list either. Such bugs will be handled
|
|
||||||
better and faster in the usual public places. See
|
|
||||||
Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst for details.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
8. Happy hacking.
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Descriptions of section entries and preferred order
|
Descriptions of section entries and preferred order
|
||||||
---------------------------------------------------
|
---------------------------------------------------
|
||||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user