| Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux 2.6 -stable releases. |
| |
| Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the |
| "-stable" tree: |
| |
| - It must be obviously correct and tested. |
| - It cannot be bigger than 100 lines, with context. |
| - It must fix only one thing. |
| - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a |
| problem..." type thing). |
| - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things |
| marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real |
| security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short, something |
| critical. |
| - Serious issues as reported by a user of a distribution kernel may also |
| be considered if they fix a notable performance or interactivity issue. |
| As these fixes are not as obvious and have a higher risk of a subtle |
| regression they should only be submitted by a distribution kernel |
| maintainer and include an addendum linking to a bugzilla entry if it |
| exists and additional information on the user-visible impact. |
| - New device IDs and quirks are also accepted. |
| - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how the |
| race can be exploited is also provided. |
| - It cannot contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes, |
| whitespace cleanups, etc). |
| - It must follow the Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules. |
| - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree (upstream). |
| |
| |
| Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree: |
| |
| - Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to |
| stable@vger.kernel.org. You must note the upstream commit ID in the |
| changelog of your submission, as well as the kernel version you wish |
| it to be applied to. |
| - To have the patch automatically included in the stable tree, add the tag |
| Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org |
| in the sign-off area. Once the patch is merged it will be applied to |
| the stable tree without anything else needing to be done by the author |
| or subsystem maintainer. |
| - If the patch requires other patches as prerequisites which can be |
| cherry-picked than this can be specified in the following format in |
| the sign-off area: |
| |
| Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # .32.x: a1f84a3: sched: Check for idle |
| Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # .32.x: 1b9508f: sched: Rate-limit newidle |
| Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # .32.x: fd21073: sched: Fix affinity logic |
| Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # .32.x |
| Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> |
| |
| The tag sequence has the meaning of: |
| git cherry-pick a1f84a3 |
| git cherry-pick 1b9508f |
| git cherry-pick fd21073 |
| git cherry-pick <this commit> |
| |
| - The sender will receive an ACK when the patch has been accepted into the |
| queue, or a NAK if the patch is rejected. This response might take a few |
| days, according to the developer's schedules. |
| - If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review by |
| other developers and by the relevant subsystem maintainer. |
| - Security patches should not be sent to this alias, but instead to the |
| documented security@kernel.org address. |
| |
| |
| Review cycle: |
| |
| - When the -stable maintainers decide for a review cycle, the patches will be |
| sent to the review committee, and the maintainer of the affected area of |
| the patch (unless the submitter is the maintainer of the area) and CC: to |
| the linux-kernel mailing list. |
| - The review committee has 48 hours in which to ACK or NAK the patch. |
| - If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel |
| members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers and |
| members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the queue. |
| - At the end of the review cycle, the ACKed patches will be added to the |
| latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen. |
| - Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from the |
| security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle. |
| Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure. |
| |
| |
| Review committee: |
| |
| - This is made up of a number of kernel developers who have volunteered for |
| this task, and a few that haven't. |