Gitiles
Code Review Sign In
gerrit-public.fairphone.software / platform / external / mesa3d / d7e0ff0e2b2e501e58b53464040af7c39688263a / . / docs / submittingpatches.html
blob: ef5be716d938def24ef78785e51ae2c53923f09e [file] [log] [blame]
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]1<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
2<html lang="en">
3<head>
4 <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
5 <title>Submitting patches</title>
6 <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="mesa.css">
7</head>
8<body>
9
10<div class="header">
11 <h1>The Mesa 3D Graphics Library</h1>
12</div>
13
14<iframe src="contents.html"></iframe>
15<div class="content">
16
17<h1>Submitting patches</h1>
18
19
20<ul>
21<li><a href="#guidelines">Basic guidelines</a>
22<li><a href="#formatting">Patch formatting</a>
23<li><a href="#testing">Testing Patches</a>
24<li><a href="#mailing">Mailing Patches</a>
25<li><a href="#reviewing">Reviewing Patches</a>
26<li><a href="#nominations">Nominating a commit for a stable branch</a>
27<li><a href="#criteria">Criteria for accepting patches to the stable branch</a>
Timothy Arcerie260bfe2016-11-21 16:30:12 +0000[diff] [blame]28<li><a href="#gittips">Git tips</a>
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]29</ul>
30
31<h2 id="guidelines">Basic guidelines</h2>
32
33<ul>
34<li>Patches should not mix code changes with code formatting changes (except,
35perhaps, in very trivial cases.)
36<li>Code patches should follow Mesa
37<a href="codingstyle.html" target="_parent">coding conventions</a>.
38<li>Whenever possible, patches should only effect individual Mesa/Gallium
39components.
40<li>Patches should never introduce build breaks and should be bisectable (see
41<code>git bisect</code>.)
42<li>Patches should be properly <a href="#formatting">formatted</a>.
43<li>Patches should be sufficiently <a href="#testing">tested</a> before submitting.
Andres Gomez28158c32016-11-28 18:47:42 +0200[diff] [blame]44<li>Patches should be submitted to <a href="#mailing">mesa-dev</a>
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]45for <a href="#reviewing">review</a> using <code>git send-email</code>.
46
47</ul>
48
49<h2 id="formatting">Patch formatting</h2>
50
51<ul>
52<li>Lines should be limited to 75 characters or less so that git logs
53displayed in 80-column terminals avoid line wrapping. Note that git
54log uses 4 spaces of indentation (4 + 75 &lt; 80).
55<li>The first line should be a short, concise summary of the change prefixed
56with a module name. Examples:
57<pre>
58 mesa: Add support for querying GL_VERTEX_ATTRIB_ARRAY_LONG
59
60 gallium: add PIPE_CAP_DEVICE_RESET_STATUS_QUERY
61
62 i965: Fix missing type in local variable declaration.
63</pre>
64<li>Subsequent patch comments should describe the change in more detail,
65if needed. For example:
66<pre>
67 i965: Remove end-of-thread SEND alignment code.
68
69 This was present in Eric's initial implementation of the compaction code
70 for Sandybridge (commit 077d01b6). There is no documentation saying this
71 is necessary, and removing it causes no regressions in piglit on any
72 platform.
73</pre>
74<li>A "Signed-off-by:" line is not required, but not discouraged either.
Emil Velikov99266ec2017-02-11 12:08:34 +0000[diff] [blame]75<li>If a patch addresses a bugzilla issue, that should be noted in the
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]76patch comment. For example:
77<pre>
78 Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=89689
79</pre>
80<li>If there have been several revisions to a patch during the review
81process, they should be noted such as in this example:
82<pre>
83 st/mesa: add ARB_texture_stencil8 support (v4)
84
85 if we support stencil texturing, enable texture_stencil8
86 there is no requirement to support native S8 for this,
87 the texture can be converted to x24s8 fine.
88
89 v2: fold fixes from Marek in:
90 a) put S8 last in the list
91 b) fix renderable to always test for d/s renderable
92 fixup the texture case to use a stencil only format
93 for picking the format for the texture view.
94 v3: hit fallback for getteximage
95 v4: put s8 back in front, it shouldn't get picked now (Ilia)
96</pre>
97<li>If someone tested your patch, document it with a line like this:
98<pre>
99 Tested-by: Joe Hacker &lt;jhacker@foo.com&gt;
100</pre>
101<li>If the patch was reviewed (usually the case) or acked by someone,
102that should be documented with:
103<pre>
104 Reviewed-by: Joe Hacker &lt;jhacker@foo.com&gt;
105 Acked-by: Joe Hacker &lt;jhacker@foo.com&gt;
106</pre>
George Kyriazisba28f212016-11-28 17:35:26 +0000[diff] [blame]107<li>If sending later revision of a patch, add all the tags - ack, r-b,
Eric Engestromfae5e1d2016-11-29 11:40:55 +0000[diff] [blame]108Cc: mesa-stable and/or other. This provides reviewers with quick feedback if the
George Kyriazisba28f212016-11-28 17:35:26 +0000[diff] [blame]109patch has already been reviewed.
Emil Velikova2283b52016-11-21 17:53:33 +0000[diff] [blame]110<li>In order for your patch to reach the prospective reviewer easier/faster,
111use the script scripts/get_reviewer.pl to get a list of individuals and include
112them in the CC list.
113<br>
114Please use common sense and do <strong>not</strong> blindly add everyone.
115<br>
116<pre>
117 $ scripts/get_reviewer.pl --help # to get the the help screen
118 $ scripts/get_reviewer.pl -f src/egl/drivers/dri2/platform_android.c
119 Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> (reviewer:ANDROID EGL SUPPORT,added_lines:188/700=27%,removed_lines:58/283=20%)
120 Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org> (reviewer:ANDROID EGL SUPPORT,authored:12/41=29%,added_lines:308/700=44%,removed_lines:115/283=41%)
121 Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@gmail.com> (authored:13/41=32%,removed_lines:76/283=27%)
122</pre>
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]123</ul>
124
125
126
127<h2 id="testing">Testing Patches</h2>
128
129<p>
130It should go without saying that patches must be tested. In general,
131do whatever testing is prudent.
132</p>
133
134<p>
135You should always run the Mesa test suite before submitting patches.
136The test suite can be run using the 'make check' command. All tests
137must pass before patches will be accepted, this may mean you have
138to update the tests themselves.
139</p>
140
141<p>
142Whenever possible and applicable, test the patch with
Eric Engestrom30cf9ff2017-02-09 02:10:17 +0000[diff] [blame]143<a href="https://piglit.freedesktop.org">Piglit</a> and/or
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]144<a href="https://android.googlesource.com/platform/external/deqp/">dEQP</a>
145to check for regressions.
146</p>
147
148
149<h2 id="mailing">Mailing Patches</h2>
150
151<p>
152Patches should be sent to the mesa-dev mailing list for review:
153<a href="https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev">
Emil Velikovb571c072016-11-16 11:54:54 +0000[diff] [blame]154mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org</a>.
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]155When submitting a patch make sure to use
156<a href="https://git-scm.com/docs/git-send-email">git send-email</a>
157rather than attaching patches to emails. Sending patches as
158attachments prevents people from being able to provide in-line review
159comments.
160</p>
161
162<p>
163When submitting follow-up patches you can use --in-reply-to to make v2, v3,
164etc patches show up as replies to the originals. This usually works well
165when you're sending out updates to individual patches (as opposed to
166re-sending the whole series). Using --in-reply-to makes
167it harder for reviewers to accidentally review old patches.
168</p>
169
170<p>
171When submitting follow-up patches you should also login to
172<a href="https://patchwork.freedesktop.org">patchwork</a> and change the
173state of your old patches to Superseded.
174</p>
175
176<h2 id="reviewing">Reviewing Patches</h2>
177
178<p>
179When you've reviewed a patch on the mailing list, please be unambiguous
180about your review. That is, state either
Emil Velikovb571c072016-11-16 11:54:54 +0000[diff] [blame]181</p>
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]182<pre>
183 Reviewed-by: Joe Hacker &lt;jhacker@foo.com&gt;
184</pre>
185or
186<pre>
187 Acked-by: Joe Hacker &lt;jhacker@foo.com&gt;
188</pre>
Emil Velikovb571c072016-11-16 11:54:54 +0000[diff] [blame]189<p>
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]190Rather than saying just "LGTM" or "Seems OK".
191</p>
192
193<p>
194If small changes are suggested, it's OK to say something like:
Emil Velikovb571c072016-11-16 11:54:54 +0000[diff] [blame]195</p>
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]196<pre>
197 With the above fixes, Reviewed-by: Joe Hacker &lt;jhacker@foo.com&gt;
198</pre>
Emil Velikovb571c072016-11-16 11:54:54 +0000[diff] [blame]199<p>
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]200which tells the patch author that the patch can be committed, as long
201as the issues are resolved first.
202</p>
203
204
205<h2 id="nominations">Nominating a commit for a stable branch</h2>
206
207<p>
Emil Velikov99266ec2017-02-11 12:08:34 +0000[diff] [blame]208There are three ways to nominate a patch for inclusion in the stable branch and
Emil Velikov07384462016-11-16 11:51:50 +0000[diff] [blame]209release.
210</p>
211<ul>
212<li> By adding the Cc: mesa-stable@ tag as described below.
213<li> Sending the commit ID (as seen in master branch) to the mesa-stable@ mailing list.
214<li> Forwarding the patch from the mesa-dev@ mailing list.
215</li>
216</ul>
217<p>
218Note: resending patch identical to one on mesa-dev@ or one that differs only
219by the extra mesa-stable@ tag is <strong>not</strong> recommended.
220</p>
221
222
223<h3 id="thetag">The stable tag</h3>
224
225<p>
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]226If you want a commit to be applied to a stable branch,
227you should add an appropriate note to the commit message.
228</p>
229
230<p>
231Here are some examples of such a note:
232</p>
233<ul>
234 <li>CC: &lt;mesa-stable@lists.freedesktop.org&gt;</li>
235 <li>CC: "9.2 10.0" &lt;mesa-stable@lists.freedesktop.org&gt;</li>
236 <li>CC: "10.0" &lt;mesa-stable@lists.freedesktop.org&gt;</li>
237</ul>
238
239Simply adding the CC to the mesa-stable list address is adequate to nominate
240the commit for the most-recently-created stable branch. It is only necessary
241to specify a specific branch name, (such as "9.2 10.0" or "10.0" in the
242examples above), if you want to nominate the commit for an older stable
243branch. And, as in these examples, you can nominate the commit for the older
244branch in addition to the more recent branch, or nominate the commit
245exclusively for the older branch.
246
247This "CC" syntax for patch nomination will cause patches to automatically be
248copied to the mesa-stable@ mailing list when you use "git send-email" to send
Emil Velikov07384462016-11-16 11:51:50 +0000[diff] [blame]249patches to the mesa-dev@ mailing list. If you prefer using --suppress-cc that
Emil Velikov99266ec2017-02-11 12:08:34 +0000[diff] [blame]250won't have any negative effect on the patch nomination.
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]251
Emil Velikov0715ba42016-12-05 16:11:21 +0000[diff] [blame]252<p>
253Note: by removing the tag [as the commit is pushed] the patch is
254<strong>explicitly</strong> rejected from inclusion in the stable branch(es).
255<br>
256Thus, drop the line <strong>only</strong> if you want to cancel the nomination.
257</p>
258
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]259<h2 id="criteria">Criteria for accepting patches to the stable branch</h2>
260
261Mesa has a designated release manager for each stable branch, and the release
Emil Velikovd7e0ff02017-02-13 19:23:38 +0000[diff] [blame^]262manager is the only developer that should be pushing changes to these branches.
263Everyone else should nominate patches using the mechanism described above.
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]264
Emil Velikovd7e0ff02017-02-13 19:23:38 +0000[diff] [blame^]265The following rules define which patches are accepted and which are not. The
266stable-release manager is also given broad discretion in rejecting patches
267that have been nominated.
268
269<ul>
270 <li>Patch must conform with the <a href="#guidelines">Basic guidelines</a></li>
271
272 <li>Patch must have landed in master first. In case where the original
273 patch is too large and/or otherwise contradicts with the rules set within, a
274 backport is appropriate.</li>
275
276 <li>It must not introduce a regression - be that build or runtime wise.
277
278 Note: If the regression is due to faulty piglit/dEQP/CTS/other test the
279 latter must be fixed first. A reference to the offending test(s) and
280 respective fix(es) should be provided in the nominated patch.</li>
281
282 <li>Patch cannot be larger than 100 lines.</li>
283
284 <li>Patches that move code around with no functional change should be
285 rejected.</li>
286
287 <li>Patch must be a bug fix and not a new feature.
288
289 Note: An exception to this rule, are hardware-enabling "features". For
290 example, backports of new code to support a newly-developed hardware product
291 can be accepted if they can be reasonably determined not to have effects on
292 other hardware.</li>
293
294 <li>Patch must be reviewed, For example, the commit message has Reviewed-by,
295 Signed-off-by, or Tested-by tags from someone but the author.</li>
296
297 <li>Performance patches are considered only if they provide information
298 about the hardware, program in question and observed improvement. Use numbers
299 to represent your measurements.</li>
300</ul>
301
302If the patch complies with the rules it will be
303<a href="releasing.html#pickntest">cherry-picked</a>. Alternatively the release
304manager will reply to the patch in question stating why the patch has been
305rejected or would request a backport.
306
307A summary of all the picked/rejected patches will be presented in the
308<a href="releasing.html#prerelease">pre-release</a> announcement.
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]309
310The stable-release manager may at times need to force-push changes to the
311stable branches, for example, to drop a previously-picked patch that was later
312identified as causing a regression). These force-pushes may cause changes to
313be lost from the stable branch if developers push things directly. Consider
314yourself warned.
315
Timothy Arcerie260bfe2016-11-21 16:30:12 +0000[diff] [blame]316<h2 id="gittips">Git tips</h2>
317
318<ul>
Emil Velikov6dae5be2016-11-28 17:40:04 +0000[diff] [blame]319<li><code>git rebase -i ...</code> is your friend. Don't be afraid to use it.
320<li>Apply a fixup to commit FOO.
321<pre>
322 git add ...
323 git commit --fixup=FOO
324 git rebase -i --autosquash ...
325</pre>
Timothy Arcerie260bfe2016-11-21 16:30:12 +0000[diff] [blame]326<li>Test for build breakage between patches e.g last 8 commits.
327<pre>
328 git rebase -i --exec="make -j4" HEAD~8
329</pre>
330<li>Sets the default mailing address for your repo.
331<pre>
332 git config --local sendemail.to mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
333</pre>
334<li> Add version to subject line of patch series in this case for the last 8
335commits before sending.
336<pre>
337 git send-email --subject-prefix="PATCH v4" HEAD~8
338 git send-email -v4 @~8 # shorter version, inherited from git format-patch
339</pre>
Emil Velikova2283b52016-11-21 17:53:33 +0000[diff] [blame]340<li> Configure git to use the get_reviewer.pl script interactively. Thus you
341can avoid adding the world to the CC list.
342<pre>
343 git config sendemail.cccmd "./scripts/get_reviewer.pl -i"
344</pre>
Timothy Arcerie260bfe2016-11-21 16:30:12 +0000[diff] [blame]345</ul>
346
Emil Velikov259e65c2016-11-16 00:20:56 +0000[diff] [blame]347
348</div>
349</body>
350</html>