aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>2006-01-09 20:53:59 -0800
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@g5.osdl.org>2006-01-10 08:01:55 -0800
commite48e99093c9bbb67f95e903d37aef30a969a0153 (patch)
tree6028b62cee789ca66b1b563a7e3fad93897310eb /Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
parent5dd94ed249c7d19934e8738bf60f9554d07e888f (diff)
downloadlinux-e48e99093c9bbb67f95e903d37aef30a969a0153.tar.gz
[PATCH] Docs update: small fixes to stable_kernel_rules.txt
Small spelling, formating & similar fixes to stable_kernel_rules.txt Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt')
-rw-r--r--Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt60
1 files changed, 29 insertions, 31 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt b/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
index 2c81305090d..e409e5d0748 100644
--- a/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
+++ b/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
@@ -1,58 +1,56 @@
Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux 2.6 -stable releases.
-Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and what ones are not, into
-the "-stable" tree:
+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 can not bigger than 100 lines, with context.
+ - It can not 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.)
+ 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.
- - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how
- the race can be exploited.
+ security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue. In short, something
+ critical.
+ - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how the
+ race can be exploited is also provided.
- It can not contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
- whitespace cleanups, etc.)
+ whitespace cleanups, etc).
- It must be accepted by the relevant subsystem maintainer.
- - It must follow Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules.
+ - It must follow the Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules.
Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree:
- Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
stable@kernel.org.
- - 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.
+ - 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.
- Security patches should not be sent to this alias, but instead to the
- documented security@kernel.org.
+ 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.
+ - 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.
+ 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 committe:
- - This will be made up of a number of kernel developers who have
- volunteered for this task, and a few that haven't.
-
+ - This is made up of a number of kernel developers who have volunteered for
+ this task, and a few that haven't.