• Home
  • Line#
  • Scopes#
  • Navigate#
  • Raw
  • Download
1.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
2
3.. _netdev-FAQ:
4
5==========
6netdev FAQ
7==========
8
9Q: What is netdev?
10------------------
11A: It is a mailing list for all network-related Linux stuff.  This
12includes anything found under net/ (i.e. core code like IPv6) and
13drivers/net (i.e. hardware specific drivers) in the Linux source tree.
14
15Note that some subsystems (e.g. wireless drivers) which have a high
16volume of traffic have their own specific mailing lists.
17
18The netdev list is managed (like many other Linux mailing lists) through
19VGER (http://vger.kernel.org/) and archives can be found below:
20
21-  http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev
22-  http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/
23
24Aside from subsystems like that mentioned above, all network-related
25Linux development (i.e. RFC, review, comments, etc.) takes place on
26netdev.
27
28Q: How do the changes posted to netdev make their way into Linux?
29-----------------------------------------------------------------
30A: There are always two trees (git repositories) in play.  Both are
31driven by David Miller, the main network maintainer.  There is the
32``net`` tree, and the ``net-next`` tree.  As you can probably guess from
33the names, the ``net`` tree is for fixes to existing code already in the
34mainline tree from Linus, and ``net-next`` is where the new code goes
35for the future release.  You can find the trees here:
36
37- https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git
38- https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next.git
39
40Q: How often do changes from these trees make it to the mainline Linus tree?
41----------------------------------------------------------------------------
42A: To understand this, you need to know a bit of background information on
43the cadence of Linux development.  Each new release starts off with a
44two week "merge window" where the main maintainers feed their new stuff
45to Linus for merging into the mainline tree.  After the two weeks, the
46merge window is closed, and it is called/tagged ``-rc1``.  No new
47features get mainlined after this -- only fixes to the rc1 content are
48expected.  After roughly a week of collecting fixes to the rc1 content,
49rc2 is released.  This repeats on a roughly weekly basis until rc7
50(typically; sometimes rc6 if things are quiet, or rc8 if things are in a
51state of churn), and a week after the last vX.Y-rcN was done, the
52official vX.Y is released.
53
54Relating that to netdev: At the beginning of the 2-week merge window,
55the ``net-next`` tree will be closed - no new changes/features.  The
56accumulated new content of the past ~10 weeks will be passed onto
57mainline/Linus via a pull request for vX.Y -- at the same time, the
58``net`` tree will start accumulating fixes for this pulled content
59relating to vX.Y
60
61An announcement indicating when ``net-next`` has been closed is usually
62sent to netdev, but knowing the above, you can predict that in advance.
63
64IMPORTANT: Do not send new ``net-next`` content to netdev during the
65period during which ``net-next`` tree is closed.
66
67Shortly after the two weeks have passed (and vX.Y-rc1 is released), the
68tree for ``net-next`` reopens to collect content for the next (vX.Y+1)
69release.
70
71If you aren't subscribed to netdev and/or are simply unsure if
72``net-next`` has re-opened yet, simply check the ``net-next`` git
73repository link above for any new networking-related commits.  You may
74also check the following website for the current status:
75
76  http://vger.kernel.org/~davem/net-next.html
77
78The ``net`` tree continues to collect fixes for the vX.Y content, and is
79fed back to Linus at regular (~weekly) intervals.  Meaning that the
80focus for ``net`` is on stabilization and bug fixes.
81
82Finally, the vX.Y gets released, and the whole cycle starts over.
83
84Q: So where are we now in this cycle?
85
86Load the mainline (Linus) page here:
87
88  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
89
90and note the top of the "tags" section.  If it is rc1, it is early in
91the dev cycle.  If it was tagged rc7 a week ago, then a release is
92probably imminent.
93
94Q: How do I indicate which tree (net vs. net-next) my patch should be in?
95-------------------------------------------------------------------------
96A: Firstly, think whether you have a bug fix or new "next-like" content.
97Then once decided, assuming that you use git, use the prefix flag, i.e.
98::
99
100  git format-patch --subject-prefix='PATCH net-next' start..finish
101
102Use ``net`` instead of ``net-next`` (always lower case) in the above for
103bug-fix ``net`` content.  If you don't use git, then note the only magic
104in the above is just the subject text of the outgoing e-mail, and you
105can manually change it yourself with whatever MUA you are comfortable
106with.
107
108Q: I sent a patch and I'm wondering what happened to it?
109--------------------------------------------------------
110Q: How can I tell whether it got merged?
111A: Start by looking at the main patchworks queue for netdev:
112
113  https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/
114
115The "State" field will tell you exactly where things are at with your
116patch.
117
118Q: The above only says "Under Review".  How can I find out more?
119----------------------------------------------------------------
120A: Generally speaking, the patches get triaged quickly (in less than
12148h).  So be patient.  Asking the maintainer for status updates on your
122patch is a good way to ensure your patch is ignored or pushed to the
123bottom of the priority list.
124
125Q: I submitted multiple versions of the patch series
126----------------------------------------------------
127Q: should I directly update patchwork for the previous versions of these
128patch series?
129A: No, please don't interfere with the patch status on patchwork, leave
130it to the maintainer to figure out what is the most recent and current
131version that should be applied. If there is any doubt, the maintainer
132will reply and ask what should be done.
133
134Q: I made changes to only a few patches in a patch series should I resend only those changed?
135---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
136A: No, please resend the entire patch series and make sure you do number your
137patches such that it is clear this is the latest and greatest set of patches
138that can be applied.
139
140Q: I 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?
141-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
142A: There is no revert possible, once it is pushed out, it stays like that.
143Please send incremental versions on top of what has been merged in order to fix
144the patches the way they would look like if your latest patch series was to be
145merged.
146
147Q: Are there special rules regarding stable submissions on netdev?
148---------------------------------------------------------------
149While it used to be the case that netdev submissions were not supposed
150to carry explicit ``CC: stable@vger.kernel.org`` tags that is no longer
151the case today. Please follow the standard stable rules in
152:ref:`Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst <stable_kernel_rules>`,
153and make sure you include appropriate Fixes tags!
154
155Q: Is the comment style convention different for the networking content?
156------------------------------------------------------------------------
157A: Yes, in a largely trivial way.  Instead of this::
158
159  /*
160   * foobar blah blah blah
161   * another line of text
162   */
163
164it is requested that you make it look like this::
165
166  /* foobar blah blah blah
167   * another line of text
168   */
169
170Q: I am working in existing code that has the former comment style and not the latter.
171--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
172Q: Should I submit new code in the former style or the latter?
173A: Make it the latter style, so that eventually all code in the domain
174of netdev is of this format.
175
176Q: I found a bug that might have possible security implications or similar.
177---------------------------------------------------------------------------
178Q: Should I mail the main netdev maintainer off-list?**
179A: No. The current netdev maintainer has consistently requested that
180people use the mailing lists and not reach out directly.  If you aren't
181OK with that, then perhaps consider mailing security@kernel.org or
182reading about http://oss-security.openwall.org/wiki/mailing-lists/distros
183as possible alternative mechanisms.
184
185Q: What level of testing is expected before I submit my change?
186---------------------------------------------------------------
187A: If your changes are against ``net-next``, the expectation is that you
188have tested by layering your changes on top of ``net-next``.  Ideally
189you will have done run-time testing specific to your change, but at a
190minimum, your changes should survive an ``allyesconfig`` and an
191``allmodconfig`` build without new warnings or failures.
192
193Q: How do I post corresponding changes to user space components?
194----------------------------------------------------------------
195A: User space code exercising kernel features should be posted
196alongside kernel patches. This gives reviewers a chance to see
197how any new interface is used and how well it works.
198
199When user space tools reside in the kernel repo itself all changes
200should generally come as one series. If series becomes too large
201or the user space project is not reviewed on netdev include a link
202to a public repo where user space patches can be seen.
203
204In case user space tooling lives in a separate repository but is
205reviewed on netdev  (e.g. patches to `iproute2` tools) kernel and
206user space patches should form separate series (threads) when posted
207to the mailing list, e.g.::
208
209  [PATCH net-next 0/3] net: some feature cover letter
210   └─ [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: some feature prep
211   └─ [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: some feature do it
212   └─ [PATCH net-next 3/3] selftest: net: some feature
213
214  [PATCH iproute2-next] ip: add support for some feature
215
216Posting as one thread is discouraged because it confuses patchwork
217(as of patchwork 2.2.2).
218
219Q: Any other tips to help ensure my net/net-next patch gets OK'd?
220-----------------------------------------------------------------
221A: Attention to detail.  Re-read your own work as if you were the
222reviewer.  You can start with using ``checkpatch.pl``, perhaps even with
223the ``--strict`` flag.  But do not be mindlessly robotic in doing so.
224If your change is a bug fix, make sure your commit log indicates the
225end-user visible symptom, the underlying reason as to why it happens,
226and then if necessary, explain why the fix proposed is the best way to
227get things done.  Don't mangle whitespace, and as is common, don't
228mis-indent function arguments that span multiple lines.  If it is your
229first patch, mail it to yourself so you can test apply it to an
230unpatched tree to confirm infrastructure didn't mangle it.
231
232Finally, go back and read
233:ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <submittingpatches>`
234to be sure you are not repeating some common mistake documented there.
235