| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
Bring the description on when to use the Reported-by: tag found in
Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst more in line with the description in
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst: before this change the two
were contradicting each other, as the latter is way more permissive and
only states '[...] if the bug was reported in private, then ask for
permission first before using the Reported-by tag.'
Signed-off-by: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/2fc7162dfb76e04da5ea903c9c170d913e735dad.1664372256.git.linux@leemhuis.info
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
|
|
Commit 31b24bee3357 ("docs: add a warning to submitting-drivers.rst")
in October 2016 already warns "This (...) should maybe just be deleted,
but I'm not quite ready to do that yet".
Maybe, six years ago, we were not ready but let us remove old content
for the better now and structure and maintain less content in the kernel
documentation with a better result.
Drop this already outdated document and adjust all textual references.
Here is an argument why deleting the content will not remove any useful
information to the existing kernel documentation, individually broken down
for each section.
Section "Allocating Device Numbers" refers to https://www.lanana.org/, and
then refers to Documentation/admin-guide/devices.rst.
However, the devices.rst clearly states:
"The version of this document at lanana.org is no longer maintained."
Everything needed for submitting drivers is already stated in devices.rst
and the reference to https://www.lanana.org/ is outdated, and should be
just deleted.
Section "Who To Submit Drivers To" is all about Linux 2.0 - 2.6, before
the new release version scheme; the mentioned developers are still around,
but actually not the first developers to contact anymore.
Section "What Criteria Determine Acceptance" has a few bullet points:
Licensing and Copyright is well-covered in process/kernel-license.rst.
Interfaces, Code, Portability, Clarity state some obvious things about
ensuring kernel code quality.
Control suggests to add a MAINTAINERS entry, which is already mentioned in
6.Followthrough.rst: "... added yourself to the MAINTAINERS file..."
PM support states a bit about implementing and testing power management of
a driver, it remains an open question where to place that in the process
documents. Driver developers interested in power management will find the
corresponding part on power management in the kernel documentation anyway.
In section "What Criteria Do Not Determine Acceptance", the points Vendor
and Author states something basic consequence of the kernel being an
open-source community software development. Probably no need to mention it
nowadays.
Section "Resources" lists resources that are also mentioned elsewhere more
central.
- Linux kernel tree and mailing list is mentioned in many places.
- https://lwn.net/Kernel/LDD3/ is mentioned in
Documentation/process/kernel-docs.rst.
- https://lwn.net/ is mentioned in:
- Documentation/process/8.Conclusion.rst
- Documentation/process/kernel-docs.rst
- https://kernelnewbies.org/ is mentioned in:
- Documentation/process/8.Conclusion.rst
- Documentation/process/kernel-docs.rst
- http://www.linux-usb.org/ is mentioned in
Documentation/driver-api/usb/usb.rst
- https://landley.net/kdocs/ols/2002/ols2002-pages-545-555.pdf
is mentioned in Documentation/process/kernel-docs.rst
- https://kernelnewbies.org/KernelJanitors is mentioned in
Documentation/process/howto.rst
- https://git-scm.com/ is mentioned in
- Documentation/process/2.Process.rst
- Documentation/process/7.AdvancedTopics.rst
- Documentation/process/howto.rst
Signed-off-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220704122537.3407-7-lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
|
|
Explain Fixes: and Link: tags in Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst,
which are missing in this file for unknown reasons and only described in
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst.
Signed-off-by: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@leemhuis.info>
CC: Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/c4a5f5e25fa84b26fd383bba6eafde4ab57c9de7.1641314856.git.linux@leemhuis.info
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
|
|
The documentation for Co-developed-by is a bit light on details, e.g. it
doesn't explicitly state that:
- Multiple Co-developed-by tags are perfectly acceptable
- Co-developed-by and Signed-off-by must be paired together
- SOB ordering should still follow standard sign-off procedure
Lack of explicit direction has resulted in developers taking a variety
of approaches, often lacking any intent whatsoever, e.g. scattering SOBs
willy-nilly, collecting them all at the end or the beginning, etc...
Tweak the wording to make it clear that multiple co-authors are allowed,
and document the expectation that standard sign-off procedures are to
be followed.
The use of "original author" has also led to confusion as many patches
don't have just one "original" author, e.g. when multiple developers
are involved from the genesis of the patch. Remove all usage of
"original" and instead call out that Co-developed-by is simply a way to
provide attribution in addition to the From tag, i.e. neither tag is
intended to imply anything with regard to who did what.
Provide examples to (hopefully) eliminate any ambiguity.
Cc: Tobin C. Harding <me@tobin.cc>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz <jorge.ramirez-ortiz@linaro.org>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
|
|
Some documents are refering to others without links. With this
patch I add those missing links.
This patch affects only documents under process/ and labels where
necessary.
Signed-off-by: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
|
|
Trivial patch to adjust the text formatting to wrap at 80 columns. No
actual content has changed.
Signed-off-by: Justin Skists <justin.skists@juzza.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
|
|
Up to now, all commit messages have used the "d" in lower case.
Signed-off-by: Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
|
|
authors
Sometimes a single patch is the result of multiple authors. As git only
can have one "author" of a patch, it is still good to properly give
credit to the other developers of a commit. To address this, document
the "Co-Developed-by:" tag which can be used to show other authors of
the patch.
Note, these other authors must also provide a Signed-off-by: tag as it
is their work that is being submitted here.
Reported-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Acked-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
|
|
The previous patch renamed several files that are cross-referenced
along the Kernel documentation. Adjust the links to point to
the right places.
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@s-opensource.com>
|
|
As we'll type this a lot, after adding CodingStyle & friends,
let's rename the directory name to a shorter one.
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@s-opensource.com>
|
