@@ -16,12 +16,10 @@ Note that some subsystems (e.g. wireless drivers) which have a high
1616volume of traffic have their own specific mailing lists.
1717
1818The netdev list is managed (like many other Linux mailing lists) through
19- VGER (http://vger.kernel.org/) and archives can be found below:
19+ VGER (http://vger.kernel.org/) with archives available at
20+ https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/
2021
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
22+ Aside from subsystems like those mentioned above, all network-related
2523Linux development (i.e. RFC, review, comments, etc.) takes place on
2624netdev.
2725
@@ -37,6 +35,17 @@ for the future release.  You can find the trees here:
3735- https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git
3836- https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next.git
3937
38+ How do I indicate which tree (net vs. net-next) my patch should be in?
39+ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
40+ To help maintainers and CI bots you should explicitly mark which tree
41+ your patch is targeting. Assuming that you use git, use the prefix
42+ flag::
43+ 
44+   git format-patch --subject-prefix='PATCH net-next' start..finish 
45+ 
46+ Use ``net `` instead of ``net-next `` (always lower case) in the above for
47+ bug-fix ``net `` content.
48+ 
4049How often do changes from these trees make it to the mainline Linus tree?
4150------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
4251To understand this, you need to know a bit of background information on
@@ -61,8 +70,12 @@ relating to vX.Y
6170An announcement indicating when ``net-next `` has been closed is usually
6271sent to netdev, but knowing the above, you can predict that in advance.
6372
64- IMPORTANT: Do not send new ``net-next `` content to netdev during the
65- period during which ``net-next `` tree is closed.
73+ .. warning ::
74+   Do not send new ``net-next `` content to netdev during the
75+   period during which ``net-next `` tree is closed.
76+ 
77+ RFC patches sent for review only are obviously welcome at any time
78+ (use ``--subject-prefix='RFC net-next' `` with ``git format-patch ``).
6679
6780Shortly after the two weeks have passed (and vX.Y-rc1 is released), the
6881tree for ``net-next `` reopens to collect content for the next (vX.Y+1)
@@ -90,41 +103,35 @@ Load the mainline (Linus) page here:
90103
91104and note the top of the "tags" section.  If it is rc1, it is early in
92105the dev cycle.  If it was tagged rc7 a week ago, then a release is
93- probably imminent.
106+ probably imminent. If the most recent tag is a final release tag
107+ (without an ``-rcN `` suffix) - we are most likely in a merge window
108+ and ``net-next `` is closed.
94109
95- How do I indicate which tree (net vs. net-next) my patch should be in?
96- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
97- Firstly, think whether you have a bug fix or new "next-like" content.
98- Then once decided, assuming that you use git, use the prefix flag, i.e.
99- ::
100- 
101-   git format-patch --subject-prefix='PATCH net-next' start..finish 
102- 
103- Use ``net `` instead of ``net-next `` (always lower case) in the above for
104- bug-fix ``net `` content.  If you don't use git, then note the only magic
105- in the above is just the subject text of the outgoing e-mail, and you
106- can manually change it yourself with whatever MUA you are comfortable
107- with.
108- 
109- I sent a patch and I'm wondering what happened to it - how can I tell whether it got merged?
110- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
110+ How can I tell the status of a patch I've sent?
111+ ----------------------------------------------- 
111112Start by looking at the main patchworks queue for netdev:
112113
113114  https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/
114115
115116The "State" field will tell you exactly where things are at with your
116- patch.
117+ patch. Patches are indexed by the ``Message-ID `` header of the emails
118+ which carried them so if you have trouble finding your patch append
119+ the value of ``Message-ID `` to the URL above.
117120
118- The above only says "Under Review".   How can I find out more ?
119- -------------------------------------------------------------  
121+ How long before my patch is accepted ?
122+ ------------------------------------- 
120123Generally speaking, the patches get triaged quickly (in less than
121- 48h).  So be patient.  Asking the maintainer for status updates on your
124+ 48h). But be patient, if your patch is active in patchwork (i.e. it's
125+ listed on the project's patch list) the chances it was missed are close to zero.
126+ Asking the maintainer for status updates on your
122127patch is a good way to ensure your patch is ignored or pushed to the
123128bottom of the priority list.
124129
125- I submitted multiple versions of the patch series. Should I directly update patchwork for the previous versions of these patch series?
126- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
127- No, please don't interfere with the patch status on patchwork, leave
130+ Should I directly update patchwork state of my own patches?
131+ ----------------------------------------------------------- 
132+ It may be tempting to help the maintainers and update the state of your
133+ own patches when you post a new version or spot a bug. Please do not do that.
134+ Interfering with the patch status on patchwork will only cause confusion. Leave
128135it to the maintainer to figure out what is the most recent and current
129136version that should be applied. If there is any doubt, the maintainer
130137will reply and ask what should be done.
@@ -135,6 +142,17 @@ No, please resend the entire patch series and make sure you do number your
135142patches such that it is clear this is the latest and greatest set of patches
136143that can be applied.
137144
145+ I have received review feedback, when should I post a revised version of the patches?
146+ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
147+ Allow at least 24 hours to pass between postings. This will ensure reviewers
148+ from all geographical locations have a chance to chime in. Do not wait
149+ too long (weeks) between postings either as it will make it harder for reviewers
150+ to recall all the context.
151+ 
152+ Make sure you address all the feedback in your new posting. Do not post a new
153+ version of the code if the discussion about the previous version is still
154+ ongoing, unless directly instructed by a reviewer.
155+ 
138156I submitted multiple versions of a patch series and it looks like a version other than the last one has been accepted, what should I do?
139157---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
140158There is no revert possible, once it is pushed out, it stays like that.
@@ -165,10 +183,10 @@ it is requested that you make it look like this::
165183   * another line of text 
166184   */ 
167185
168- I am working in existing code that has the former comment style and not the latter. Should I submit new code in the former style or the latter ?
169- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  
170- Make it  the latter style , so that eventually all code in the domain 
171- of netdev is of this  format.
186+ I am working in existing code which uses non-standard formatting. Which formatting should I use ?
187+ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
188+ Make your code follow  the most recent guidelines , so that eventually all code
189+ in the domain  of netdev is in the preferred  format.
172190
173191I found a bug that might have possible security implications or similar. Should I mail the main netdev maintainer off-list?
174192--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
@@ -180,11 +198,15 @@ as possible alternative mechanisms.
180198
181199What level of testing is expected before I submit my change?
182200------------------------------------------------------------ 
183- If your changes are against ``net-next ``, the expectation is that you
184- have tested by layering your changes on top of ``net-next ``.  Ideally
185- you will have done run-time testing specific to your change, but at a
186- minimum, your changes should survive an ``allyesconfig `` and an
187- ``allmodconfig `` build without new warnings or failures.
201+ At the very minimum your changes must survive an ``allyesconfig `` and an
202+ ``allmodconfig `` build with ``W=1 `` set without new warnings or failures.
203+ 
204+ Ideally you will have done run-time testing specific to your change,
205+ and the patch series contains a set of kernel selftest for
206+ ``tools/testing/selftests/net `` or using the KUnit framework.
207+ 
208+ You are expected to test your changes on top of the relevant networking
209+ tree (``net `` or ``net-next ``) and not e.g. a stable tree or ``linux-next ``.
188210
189211How do I post corresponding changes to user space components?
190212------------------------------------------------------------- 
@@ -198,7 +220,7 @@ or the user space project is not reviewed on netdev include a link
198220to a public repo where user space patches can be seen.
199221
200222In case user space tooling lives in a separate repository but is
201- reviewed on netdev  (e.g. patches to `iproute2 ` tools) kernel and
223+ reviewed on netdev  (e.g. patches to `` iproute2 ` ` tools) kernel and
202224user space patches should form separate series (threads) when posted
203225to the mailing list, e.g.::
204226
@@ -231,18 +253,18 @@ traffic if we can help it.
231253netdevsim is great, can I extend it for my out-of-tree tests?
232254------------------------------------------------------------- 
233255
234- No, `netdevsim ` is a test vehicle solely for upstream tests.
235- (Please add your tests under tools/testing/selftests/.)
256+ No, `` netdevsim ` ` is a test vehicle solely for upstream tests.
257+ (Please add your tests under `` tools/testing/selftests/ `` .)
236258
237- We also give no guarantees that `netdevsim ` won't change in the future
259+ We also give no guarantees that `` netdevsim ` ` won't change in the future
238260in a way which would break what would normally be considered uAPI.
239261
240262Is netdevsim considered a "user" of an API?
241263------------------------------------------- 
242264
243265Linux kernel has a long standing rule that no API should be added unless
244- it has a real, in-tree user. Mock-ups and tests based on `netdevsim ` are
245- strongly encouraged when adding new APIs, but `netdevsim ` in itself
266+ it has a real, in-tree user. Mock-ups and tests based on `` netdevsim ` ` are
267+ strongly encouraged when adding new APIs, but `` netdevsim ` ` in itself
246268is **not ** considered a use case/user.
247269
248270Any other tips to help ensure my net/net-next patch gets OK'd?
0 commit comments