On 12/15/13 12:59, Josh Triplett wrote: > Most of the mechanical portions of SubmittingPatches exist to help patch > submitters replicate the output of git. Mention this explicitly, both > as a reminder that git will help with this process, and as signposting to > let git users know what they can safely skip. > > Signed-off-by: Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 31 ++++++++++++++++--------------- > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches > index 53e6590..fdad7d1 100644 > --- a/Documentation/SubmittingPatches > +++ b/Documentation/SubmittingPatches > @@ -14,7 +14,10 @@ Read Documentation/SubmitChecklist for a list of items to check > before submitting code. If you are submitting a driver, also read > Documentation/SubmittingDrivers. > > - > +Many of these steps describe the default behavior of the git version > +control system; if you use git to prepare your patches, you'll find much > +of the mechanical work done for you, though you'll still need to prepare > +and document a sensible set of patches. > > -------------------------------------------- > SECTION 1 - CREATING AND SENDING YOUR CHANGE > @@ -25,7 +28,9 @@ SECTION 1 - CREATING AND SENDING YOUR CHANGE > 1) "diff -up" > ------------ > > -Use "diff -up" or "diff -uprN" to create patches. > +Use "diff -up" or "diff -uprN" to create patches. git generates patches > +in this form by default; if you're using git, you can skip this section > +entirely. > > All changes to the Linux kernel occur in the form of patches, as > generated by diff(1). When creating your patch, make sure to create it > @@ -66,19 +71,14 @@ Make sure your patch does not include any extra files which do not > belong in a patch submission. Make sure to review your patch -after- > generated it with diff(1), to ensure accuracy. > > -If your changes produce a lot of deltas, you may want to look into > -splitting them into individual patches which modify things in > -logical stages. This will facilitate easier reviewing by other > -kernel developers, very important if you want your patch accepted. > -There are a number of scripts which can aid in this: > - I object to the removal of the quilt reference. git is overkill for simple patches. > -Quilt: > -http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/quilt > +If your changes produce a lot of deltas, you need to split them into > +individual patches which modify things in logical stages; see section > +#3. This will facilitate easier reviewing by other kernel developers, > +very important if you want your patch accepted. > > -Andrew Morton's patch scripts: > -http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/stuff/patch-scripts.tar.gz > -Instead of these scripts, quilt is the recommended patch management > -tool (see above). > +If you're using git, "git rebase -i" can help you with this process. If > +you're not using git, quilt <http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/quilt> > +is another popular alternative. > > > > @@ -607,7 +607,8 @@ patch. > If you are going to include a diffstat after the "---" marker, please > use diffstat options "-p 1 -w 70" so that filenames are listed from > the top of the kernel source tree and don't use too much horizontal > -space (easily fit in 80 columns, maybe with some indentation). > +space (easily fit in 80 columns, maybe with some indentation). (git > +generates appropriate diffstats by default.) > > See more details on the proper patch format in the following > references. > -- ~Randy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
