Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751832AbaLOQeA (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Dec 2014 11:34:00 -0500 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:40210 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751053AbaLOQd7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Dec 2014 11:33:59 -0500 Message-ID: <548F0D71.8090007@infradead.org> Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 08:33:53 -0800 From: Randy Dunlap User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jonathan Corbet , LKML CC: Corey Minyard Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Docs: Modernize SubmittingPatches References: <20141215105251.16913f8c@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: <20141215105251.16913f8c@lwn.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Jonathan, Overall this is good but it was difficult to review -- maybe too many varying types of changes. I have a few minor corrections below. Use them (or not) any way that you like. On 12/15/14 07:52, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > The SubmittingPatches file still shows a lot of its roots from the era when > we all sent stuff straight to Linus and hoped for the best. I've gone in > and thrashed it up to reflect an age where few of us type our own "diff" > commands anymore. Also added a section on preparing signed tags for pull > requests. > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet > --- > Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 433 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- > 1 file changed, 212 insertions(+), 221 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches > index 1fa1caa198eb..787d0711e18a 100644 > --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches > +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches [snip] > -5) Select e-mail destination. > +You should be able to justify all violations that remain in your > +patch. > > -Look through the MAINTAINERS file and the source code, and determine > -if your change applies to a specific subsystem of the kernel, with > -an assigned maintainer. If so, e-mail that person. The script > -scripts/get_maintainer.pl can be very useful at this step. > > -If no maintainer is listed, or the maintainer does not respond, send > -your patch to the primary Linux kernel developer's mailing list, > -linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org. Most kernel developers monitor this > -e-mail list, and can comment on your changes. > +5) Select the recipients for your patch. > +---------------------------------------- > > +You should always copy the appropriate subsystem maintainer(s) on any patch > +to code that they maintain; Look through the MAINTAINERS file and the maintain. alternately: ; look > +source code revision history to see who those maintainers are. The > +script scripts/get_maintainer.pl can be very useful at this step. If you > +cannot find a maintainer for the subsystem your are working on, Andrew > +Morton (akpm@linux-foundation.org) serves as a maintainer of last resort. [snip] > +Patches that fix a severe bug in a released kernel should be directed > +toward the stable maintainers; putting a line like this: maintainers by putting a line like this in your patch: > > + Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > -6) Select your CC (e-mail carbon copy) list. > +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. [snip] > +7) E-mail size. > +--------------- > > Large changes are not appropriate for mailing lists, and some > maintainers. If your patch, uncompressed, exceeds 300 kB in size, > it is preferred that you store your patch on an Internet-accessible > -server, and provide instead a URL (link) pointing to your patch. > +server, and provide instead a URL (link) pointing to your patch. But note > +that if your patch exceeds 300kB, it almost certainly needs to be broken up 300 kB [as above, or change the other one] > +anyway. > > +8) Respond to review comments. > +------------------------------ > > +Your patch will almost certainly get comments from reviewers on ways in > +which the patch can be improved. You must respond to those comments; > +ignoring reviewers is a good way to get ignored in return. Review comments > +or questions that to not lead to a code change should almost certainly do not > +bring about a comment or changelog entry so that the next reviewer better > +understands what is going on. > > -9) Name your kernel version. > +Be sure to tell the reviewers what changes you are making and to thank them > +for their time. Code review is a tiring and time-consuming process, and > +reviewers sometimes get grumpy. Even in that case, though, respond > +politely and address the problems they have pointed out. > > -It is important to note, either in the subject line or in the patch > -description, the kernel version to which this patch applies. > > -If the patch does not apply cleanly to the latest kernel version, > -Linus will not apply it. > +9) Don't get discouraged - or impatient. > +---------------------------------------- > > +After you have submitted your change, be patient and wait. Reviewers are > +busy people and may not get to your patch right away. > > +Once upon a time, patches used to dissappear into the void without comment, disappear > +but the development process works more smoothly than that now. You should > +receive comments within a week or so; if that does not happen, make sure > +that you have sent your patches to the right place. Wait for a minimum of > +one week before resubmitting or pinging reviewers - possibly longer during > +busy times like merge windows. [snip] > @@ -541,7 +592,13 @@ which stable kernel versions should receive your fix. This is the preferred > method for indicating a bug fixed by the patch. See #2 above for more details. > > > -15) The canonical patch format > +14) The canonical patch format > +------------------------------ > + > +This section describes how the patch itself should be formatted. Note > +that, if you have your patches stored in a git repository, proper patch > +formatting can be had with "git format-patch". The tools can not create cannot > +the necessary text, though, so read the instructions below anyway. > > The canonical patch subject line is: [snip] -- ~Randy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/