docs: netdev: add a note on selftest posting

We haven't had much discussion on the list about this, but
a handful of people have been confused about rules on
posting selftests for fixes, lately. I t

docs: netdev: add a note on selftest posting

We haven't had much discussion on the list about this, but
a handful of people have been confused about rules on
posting selftests for fixes, lately. I tend to post fixes
with their respective selftests in the same series.
There are tradeoffs around size of the net tree and conflicts
but so far it hasn't been a major issue.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Cong Wang <[email protected]>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: document requirements for Supported status

As announced back in April, require running upstream tests
to maintain Supported status for NIC drivers:

https://lore.kernel.org/202404251

docs: netdev: document requirements for Supported status

As announced back in April, require running upstream tests
to maintain Supported status for NIC drivers:

https://lore.kernel.org/[email protected]

Multiple vendors have been "working on it" for months.
Let's make it official.

Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <[email protected]>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: document guidance on cleanup patches

The purpose of this section is to document what is the current practice
regarding clean-up patches which address checkpatch warnings and similar
pr

docs: netdev: document guidance on cleanup patches

The purpose of this section is to document what is the current practice
regarding clean-up patches which address checkpatch warnings and similar
problems. I feel there is a value in having this documented so others
can easily refer to it.

Clearly this topic is subjective. And to some extent the current
practice discourages a wider range of patches than is described here.
But I feel it is best to start somewhere, with the most well established
part of the current practice.

Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <[email protected]>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: document guidance on cleanup.h

Document what was discussed multiple times on list and various
virtual / in-person conversations. guard() being okay in functions
<= 20 LoC is a bit of m

docs: netdev: document guidance on cleanup.h

Document what was discussed multiple times on list and various
virtual / in-person conversations. guard() being okay in functions
<= 20 LoC is a bit of my own invention. If the function is trivial
it should be fine, but feel free to disagree :)

We'll obviously revisit this guidance as time passes and we and other
subsystems get more experience.

Reviewed-by: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Nikolay Aleksandrov <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <[email protected]>

show more ...

net: drop special comment style

As we discussed in the room at netdevconf earlier this week,
drop the requirement for special comment style for netdev.

For checkpatch, the general check accepts bot

net: drop special comment style

As we discussed in the room at netdevconf earlier this week,
drop the requirement for special comment style for netdev.

For checkpatch, the general check accepts both right now, so
simply drop the special request there as well.

Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>

show more ...

Documentation: fix links to mailing list services

There have been some changes to the way mailing lists are hosted at
kernel.org. This patch does the following:

1. fixes links that are pointing at

Documentation: fix links to mailing list services

There have been some changes to the way mailing lists are hosted at
kernel.org. This patch does the following:

1. fixes links that are pointing at the outdated resources
2. removes an outdated patchbomb admonition

We still don't particularly want or welcome huge patchbombs, but they
are less likely to overload our systems.

Acked-by: Dan Williams <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ryabitsev <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Carlos Bilbao <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240619-docs-patch-msgid-link-v2-1-72dd272bfe37@linuxfoundation.org

show more ...

docs: netdev: Fix typo in Signed-off-by tag

s/of/off/

Signed-off-by: Thorsten Blum <[email protected]>
Fixes: e110ba659271 ("docs: netdev: add note about Changes Requested and revising commi

docs: netdev: Fix typo in Signed-off-by tag

s/of/off/

Signed-off-by: Thorsten Blum <[email protected]>
Fixes: e110ba659271 ("docs: netdev: add note about Changes Requested and revising commit messages")
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: update the link to the CI repo

Netronome graciously transferred the original NIPA repo
to our new netdev umbrella org. Link to that instead of
my private fork.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Ki

docs: netdev: update the link to the CI repo

Netronome graciously transferred the original NIPA repo
to our new netdev umbrella org. Link to that instead of
my private fork.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: try to guide people on dealing with silence

There has been more than a few threads which went idle before
the merge window and now people came back to them and started
asking about nex

docs: netdev: try to guide people on dealing with silence

There has been more than a few threads which went idle before
the merge window and now people came back to them and started
asking about next steps.

We currently tell people to be patient and not to repost too
often. Our "not too often", however, is still a few orders of
magnitude faster than other subsystems. Or so I feel after
hearing people talk about review rates at LPC.

Clarify in the doc that if the discussion went idle for a week
on netdev, 95% of the time there's no point waiting longer.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: try to encourage (netdev?) reviewers

Add a section to netdev maintainer doc encouraging reviewers
to chime in on the mailing list.

The questions about "when is it okay to share feedback"
keep

docs: try to encourage (netdev?) reviewers

Add a section to netdev maintainer doc encouraging reviewers
to chime in on the mailing list.

The questions about "when is it okay to share feedback"
keep coming up (most recently at netconf) and the answer
is "pretty much always".

Extend the section of 7.AdvancedTopics.rst which deals
with reviews a little bit to add stuff we had been recommending
locally.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Martin Habets <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: update the netdev infra URLs

Some corporate proxies block our current NIPA URLs because
they use a free / shady DNS domain. As suggested by Jesse
we got a new DNS entry from Konstantin

docs: netdev: update the netdev infra URLs

Some corporate proxies block our current NIPA URLs because
they use a free / shady DNS domain. As suggested by Jesse
we got a new DNS entry from Konstantin - netdev.bots.linux.dev,
use it.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: document patchwork patch states

The patchwork states are largely self-explanatory but small
ambiguities may still come up. Document how we interpret
the states in networking.

Signed-o

docs: netdev: document patchwork patch states

The patchwork states are largely self-explanatory but small
ambiguities may still come up. Document how we interpret
the states in networking.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: recommend against --in-reply-to

It's somewhat unfortunate but with (my?) the current tooling
if people post new versions of a set in reply to an old version
managing the review queue g

docs: netdev: recommend against --in-reply-to

It's somewhat unfortunate but with (my?) the current tooling
if people post new versions of a set in reply to an old version
managing the review queue gets difficult. So recommend against it.

Reviewed-by: Martin Habets <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: update the URL of the status page

Move the status page from vger to the same server as mailbot.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by:

docs: netdev: update the URL of the status page

Move the status page from vger to the same server as mailbot.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: broaden mailbot to all MAINTAINERS

Reword slightly now that all MAINTAINERS have access to the commands.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <sim

docs: netdev: broaden mailbot to all MAINTAINERS

Reword slightly now that all MAINTAINERS have access to the commands.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: document the existence of the mail bot

We had a good run, but after 4 weeks of use we heard someone
asking about pw-bot commands. Let's explain its existence
in the docs. It's not a co

docs: netdev: document the existence of the mail bot

We had a good run, but after 4 weeks of use we heard someone
asking about pw-bot commands. Let's explain its existence
in the docs. It's not a complete documentation but hopefully
it's enough for the casual contributor. The project and scope
are in flux so the details would likely become out of date,
if we were to document more in depth.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: clarify the need to sending reverts as patches

We don't state explicitly that reverts need to be submitted
as a patch. It occasionally comes up.

Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel

docs: netdev: clarify the need to sending reverts as patches

We don't state explicitly that reverts need to be submitted
as a patch. It occasionally comes up.

Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: add note about Changes Requested and revising commit messages

One of the most commonly asked questions is "I answered all questions
and don't need to make any code changes, why was the

docs: netdev: add note about Changes Requested and revising commit messages

One of the most commonly asked questions is "I answered all questions
and don't need to make any code changes, why was the patch not applied".
Document our time honored tradition of asking people to repost with
improved commit messages, to record the answers to reviewer questions.

Take this opportunity to also recommend a change log format.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: convert to a non-FAQ document

The netdev-FAQ document has grown over the years to the point
where finding information in it is somewhat challenging.
The length of the questions prevent

docs: netdev: convert to a non-FAQ document

The netdev-FAQ document has grown over the years to the point
where finding information in it is somewhat challenging.
The length of the questions prevents readers from locating
content that's relevant at a glance.

Convert to a more standard documentation format with sections
and sub-sections rather than questions and answers.

The content edits are limited to what's necessary to change
the format, and very minor clarifications.

Reviewed-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: reshuffle sections in prep for de-FAQization

Subsequent changes will reformat the doc away from FAQ.
To make that more readable perform the pure section moves now.

Reviewed-by: Randy

docs: netdev: reshuffle sections in prep for de-FAQization

Subsequent changes will reformat the doc away from FAQ.
To make that more readable perform the pure section moves now.

Reviewed-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: offer performance feedback to contributors

Some of us gotten used to producing large quantities of peer feedback
at work, every 3 or 6 months. Extending the same courtesy to community

docs: netdev: offer performance feedback to contributors

Some of us gotten used to producing large quantities of peer feedback
at work, every 3 or 6 months. Extending the same courtesy to community
members seems like a logical step. It may be hard for some folks to
get validation of how important their work is internally, especially
at smaller companies which don't employ many kernel experts.

The concept of "peer feedback" may be a hyperscaler / silicon valley
thing so YMMV. Hopefully we can build more context as we go.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: add a cheat sheet for the rules

Summarize the rules we see broken most often and which may
be less familiar to kernel devs who are used to working outside
of netdev.

Signed-off-by: Ja

docs: netdev: add a cheat sheet for the rules

Summarize the rules we see broken most often and which may
be less familiar to kernel devs who are used to working outside
of netdev.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: document reverse xmas tree

Similarly to the 15 patch rule the reverse xmas tree is not
documented.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lun

docs: netdev: document reverse xmas tree

Similarly to the 15 patch rule the reverse xmas tree is not
documented.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: document that patch series length limit

We had been asking people to avoid massive patch series but it does
not appear in the FAQ.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Revi

docs: netdev: document that patch series length limit

We had been asking people to avoid massive patch series but it does
not appear in the FAQ.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>

show more ...

docs: netdev: move the netdev-FAQ to the process pages

The documentation for the tip tree is really in quite a similar
spirit to the netdev-FAQ. Move the netdev-FAQ to the process docs
as well.

Sig

docs: netdev: move the netdev-FAQ to the process pages

The documentation for the tip tree is really in quite a similar
spirit to the netdev-FAQ. Move the netdev-FAQ to the process docs
as well.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <[email protected]>

show more ...