Make sure all questions are headings. Some questions are currently on multiple lines, and the continuation lines appear as part of the answer when rendered. One question was also missing an underline completely. Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst | 35 +++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst b/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst index 642fa963be3c..633d558743b2 100644 --- a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst +++ b/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst @@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ focus for ``net`` is on stabilization and bug fixes. Finally, the vX.Y gets released, and the whole cycle starts over. Q: So where are we now in this cycle? - +------------------------------------- Load the mainline (Linus) page here: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git @@ -105,9 +105,8 @@ in the above is just the subject text of the outgoing e-mail, and you can manually change it yourself with whatever MUA you are comfortable with. -Q: I sent a patch and I'm wondering what happened to it? --------------------------------------------------------- -Q: How can I tell whether it got merged? +Q: I sent a patch and I'm wondering what happened to it? How can I tell whether it got merged? +---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A: Start by looking at the main patchworks queue for netdev: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/list/ @@ -122,10 +121,8 @@ A: Generally speaking, the patches get triaged quickly (in less than patch is a good way to ensure your patch is ignored or pushed to the bottom of the priority list. -Q: I submitted multiple versions of the patch series ----------------------------------------------------- -Q: should I directly update patchwork for the previous versions of these -patch series? +Q: I submitted multiple versions of the patch series should I directly update patchwork for the previous versions of these patch series? +---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A: No, please don't interfere with the patch status on patchwork, leave it to the maintainer to figure out what is the most recent and current version that should be applied. If there is any doubt, the maintainer @@ -169,10 +166,8 @@ simply clone the repo, and then git grep the mainline commit ID, e.g. releases/3.9.8/ipv6-fix-possible-crashes-in-ip6_cork_release.patch stable/stable-queue$ -Q: I see a network patch and I think it should be backported to stable. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -Q: Should I request it via stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx like the references in -the kernel's Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst file say? +Q: I see a network patch and I think it should be backported to stable. Should I request it via stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx like the references in the kernel's Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst file say? +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A: No, not for networking. Check the stable queues as per above first to see if it is already queued. If not, then send a mail to netdev, listing the upstream commit ID and why you think it should be a stable @@ -190,10 +185,8 @@ mainline, the better the odds that it is an OK candidate for stable. So scrambling to request a commit be added the day after it appears should be avoided. -Q: I have created a network patch and I think it should be backported to stable. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -Q: Should I add a Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx like the references in the -kernel's Documentation/ directory say? +Q: I have created a network patch and I think it should be backported to stable. Should I add a Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx like the references in the kernel's Documentation/ directory say? +-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A: No. See above answer. In short, if you think it really belongs in stable, then ensure you write a decent commit log that describes who gets impacted by the bug fix and how it manifests itself, and when the @@ -231,15 +224,13 @@ Q: Is the comment style convention different for the networking content? * another line of text */ -Q: I am working in existing code that has the former comment style and not the latter. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -Q: Should I submit new code in the former style or the latter? +Q: I am working in existing code that has the former comment style and not the latter. Should I submit new code in the former style or the latter? +-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A: Make it the latter style, so that eventually all code in the domain of netdev is of this format. -Q: I found a bug that might have possible security implications or similar. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -Q: Should I mail the main netdev maintainer off-list?** +Q: I found a bug that might have possible security implications or similar. Should I mail the main netdev maintainer off-list? +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A: No. The current netdev maintainer has consistently requested that people use the mailing lists and not reach out directly. If you aren't OK with that, then perhaps consider mailing security@xxxxxxxxxx or -- 2.23.0
