diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst | 101 |
1 files changed, 67 insertions, 34 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst index 91de63b201c1..c66a19201deb 100644 --- a/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst +++ b/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst @@ -341,6 +341,16 @@ that you have sent your patches to the right place. Wait for a minimum of one week before resubmitting or pinging reviewers - possibly longer during busy times like merge windows. +It's also ok to resend the patch or the patch series after a couple of +weeks with the word "RESEND" added to the subject line:: + + [PATCH Vx RESEND] sub/sys: Condensed patch summary + +Don't add "RESEND" when you are submitting a modified version of your +patch or patch series - "RESEND" only applies to resubmission of a +patch or patch series which have not been modified in any way from the +previous submission. + Include PATCH in the subject ----------------------------- @@ -625,16 +635,19 @@ not considered part of the summary phrase, but describe how the patch should be treated. Common tags might include a version descriptor if the multiple versions of the patch have been sent out in response to comments (i.e., "v1, v2, v3"), or "RFC" to indicate a request for -comments. If there are four patches in a patch series the individual -patches may be numbered like this: 1/4, 2/4, 3/4, 4/4. This assures -that developers understand the order in which the patches should be -applied and that they have reviewed or applied all of the patches in -the patch series. +comments. -A couple of example Subjects:: +If there are four patches in a patch series the individual patches may +be numbered like this: 1/4, 2/4, 3/4, 4/4. This assures that developers +understand the order in which the patches should be applied and that +they have reviewed or applied all of the patches in the patch series. + +Here are some good example Subjects:: Subject: [PATCH 2/5] ext2: improve scalability of bitmap searching Subject: [PATCH v2 01/27] x86: fix eflags tracking + Subject: [PATCH v2] sub/sys: Condensed patch summary + Subject: [PATCH v2 M/N] sub/sys: Condensed patch summary The ``from`` line must be the very first line in the message body, and has the form: @@ -647,34 +660,54 @@ then the ``From:`` line from the email header will be used to determine the patch author in the changelog. The explanation body will be committed to the permanent source -changelog, so should make sense to a competent reader who has long -since forgotten the immediate details of the discussion that might -have led to this patch. Including symptoms of the failure which the -patch addresses (kernel log messages, oops messages, etc.) is -especially useful for people who might be searching the commit logs -looking for the applicable patch. If a patch fixes a compile failure, -it may not be necessary to include _all_ of the compile failures; just -enough that it is likely that someone searching for the patch can find -it. As in the ``summary phrase``, it is important to be both succinct as -well as descriptive. - -The ``---`` marker line serves the essential purpose of marking for patch -handling tools where the changelog message ends. - -One good use for the additional comments after the ``---`` marker is for -a ``diffstat``, to show what files have changed, and the number of -inserted and deleted lines per file. A ``diffstat`` is especially useful -on bigger patches. Other comments relevant only to the moment or the -maintainer, not suitable for the permanent changelog, should also go -here. A good example of such comments might be ``patch changelogs`` -which describe what has changed between the v1 and v2 version of the -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). (``git`` -generates appropriate diffstats by default.) +changelog, so should make sense to a competent reader who has long since +forgotten the immediate details of the discussion that might have led to +this patch. Including symptoms of the failure which the patch addresses +(kernel log messages, oops messages, etc.) are especially useful for +people who might be searching the commit logs looking for the applicable +patch. The text should be written in such detail so that when read +weeks, months or even years later, it can give the reader the needed +details to grasp the reasoning for **why** the patch was created. + +If a patch fixes a compile failure, it may not be necessary to include +_all_ of the compile failures; just enough that it is likely that +someone searching for the patch can find it. As in the ``summary +phrase``, it is important to be both succinct as well as descriptive. + +The ``---`` marker line serves the essential purpose of marking for +patch handling tools where the changelog message ends. + +One good use for the additional comments after the ``---`` marker is +for a ``diffstat``, to show what files have changed, and the number of +inserted and deleted lines per file. A ``diffstat`` is especially useful +on bigger patches. 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). (``git`` generates appropriate diffstats by default.) + +Other comments relevant only to the moment or the maintainer, not +suitable for the permanent changelog, should also go here. A good +example of such comments might be ``patch changelogs`` which describe +what has changed between the v1 and v2 version of the patch. + +Please put this information **after** the ``---`` line which separates +the changelog from the rest of the patch. The version information is +not part of the changelog which gets committed to the git tree. It is +additional information for the reviewers. If it's placed above the +commit tags, it needs manual interaction to remove it. If it is below +the separator line, it gets automatically stripped off when applying the +patch:: + + <commit message> + ... + Signed-off-by: Author <author@mail> + --- + V2 -> V3: Removed redundant helper function + V1 -> V2: Cleaned up coding style and addressed review comments + + path/to/file | 5+++-- + ... See more details on the proper patch format in the following references. |