1.. _stable_kernel_rules:
2
3Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux -stable releases
4===============================================================
5
6Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the
7"-stable" tree:
8
9- It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linux mainline (upstream).
10- It must be obviously correct and tested.
11- It cannot be bigger than 100 lines, with context.
12- It must follow the
13  :ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <submittingpatches>`
14  rules.
15- It must either fix a real bug that bothers people or just add a device ID.
16  To elaborate on the former:
17
18  - It fixes a problem like an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real security
19    issue, a hardware quirk, a build error (but not for things marked
20    CONFIG_BROKEN), or some "oh, that's not good" issue.
21  - Serious issues as reported by a user of a distribution kernel may also
22    be considered if they fix a notable performance or interactivity issue.
23    As these fixes are not as obvious and have a higher risk of a subtle
24    regression they should only be submitted by a distribution kernel
25    maintainer and include an addendum linking to a bugzilla entry if it
26    exists and additional information on the user-visible impact.
27  - No "This could be a problem..." type of things like a "theoretical race
28    condition", unless an explanation of how the bug can be exploited is also
29    provided.
30  - No "trivial" fixes without benefit for users (spelling changes, whitespace
31    cleanups, etc).
32
33
34Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree
35----------------------------------------------------
36
37.. note::
38
39   Security patches should not be handled (solely) by the -stable review
40   process but should follow the procedures in
41   :ref:`Documentation/process/security-bugs.rst <securitybugs>`.
42
43There are three options to submit a change to -stable trees:
44
451. Add a 'stable tag' to the description of a patch you then submit for
46   mainline inclusion.
472. Ask the stable team to pick up a patch already mainlined.
483. Submit a patch to the stable team that is equivalent to a change already
49   mainlined.
50
51The sections below describe each of the options in more detail.
52
53:ref:`option_1` is **strongly** preferred, it is the easiest and most common.
54:ref:`option_2` is mainly meant for changes where backporting was not considered
55at the time of submission. :ref:`option_3` is an alternative to the two earlier
56options for cases where a mainlined patch needs adjustments to apply in older
57series (for example due to API changes).
58
59When using option 2 or 3 you can ask for your change to be included in specific
60stable series. When doing so, ensure the fix or an equivalent is applicable,
61submitted, or already present in all newer stable trees still supported. This is
62meant to prevent regressions that users might later encounter on updating, if
63e.g. a fix merged for 5.19-rc1 would be backported to 5.10.y, but not to 5.15.y.
64
65.. _option_1:
66
67Option 1
68********
69
70To have a patch you submit for mainline inclusion later automatically picked up
71for stable trees, add this tag in the sign-off area::
72
73  Cc: [email protected]
74
75Use ``Cc: [email protected]`` instead when fixing unpublished vulnerabilities:
76it reduces the chance of accidentally exposing the fix to the public by way of
77'git send-email', as mails sent to that address are not delivered anywhere.
78
79Once the patch is mainlined it will be applied to the stable tree without
80anything else needing to be done by the author or subsystem maintainer.
81
82To sent additional instructions to the stable team, use a shell-style inline
83comment to pass arbitrary or predefined notes:
84
85* Specify any additional patch prerequisites for cherry picking::
86
87    Cc: <[email protected]> # 3.3.x: a1f84a3: sched: Check for idle
88    Cc: <[email protected]> # 3.3.x: 1b9508f: sched: Rate-limit newidle
89    Cc: <[email protected]> # 3.3.x: fd21073: sched: Fix affinity logic
90    Cc: <[email protected]> # 3.3.x
91    Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
92
93  The tag sequence has the meaning of::
94
95    git cherry-pick a1f84a3
96    git cherry-pick 1b9508f
97    git cherry-pick fd21073
98    git cherry-pick <this commit>
99
100  Note that for a patch series, you do not have to list as prerequisites the
101  patches present in the series itself. For example, if you have the following
102  patch series::
103
104    patch1
105    patch2
106
107  where patch2 depends on patch1, you do not have to list patch1 as
108  prerequisite of patch2 if you have already marked patch1 for stable
109  inclusion.
110
111* Point out kernel version prerequisites::
112
113    Cc: <[email protected]> # 3.3.x
114
115  The tag has the meaning of::
116
117    git cherry-pick <this commit>
118
119  For each "-stable" tree starting with the specified version.
120
121  Note, such tagging is unnecessary if the stable team can derive the
122  appropriate versions from Fixes: tags.
123
124* Delay pick up of patches::
125
126    Cc: <[email protected]> # after -rc3
127
128* Point out known problems::
129
130    Cc: <[email protected]> # see patch description, needs adjustments for <= 6.3
131
132.. _option_2:
133
134Option 2
135********
136
137If the patch already has been merged to mainline, send an email to
138[email protected] containing the subject of the patch, the commit ID,
139why you think it should be applied, and what kernel versions you wish it to
140be applied to.
141
142.. _option_3:
143
144Option 3
145********
146
147Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
148[email protected] and mention the kernel versions you wish it to be applied
149to. When doing so, you must note the upstream commit ID in the changelog of your
150submission with a separate line above the commit text, like this::
151
152  commit <sha1> upstream.
153
154Or alternatively::
155
156  [ Upstream commit <sha1> ]
157
158If the submitted patch deviates from the original upstream patch (for example
159because it had to be adjusted for the older API), this must be very clearly
160documented and justified in the patch description.
161
162
163Following the submission
164------------------------
165
166The sender will receive an ACK when the patch has been accepted into the
167queue, or a NAK if the patch is rejected.  This response might take a few
168days, according to the schedules of the stable team members.
169
170If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review by other
171developers and by the relevant subsystem maintainer.
172
173
174Review cycle
175------------
176
177- When the -stable maintainers decide for a review cycle, the patches will be
178  sent to the review committee, and the maintainer of the affected area of
179  the patch (unless the submitter is the maintainer of the area) and CC: to
180  the linux-kernel mailing list.
181- The review committee has 48 hours in which to ACK or NAK the patch.
182- If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel
183  members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers and
184  members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the queue.
185- The ACKed patches will be posted again as part of release candidate (-rc)
186  to be tested by developers and testers.
187- Usually only one -rc release is made, however if there are any outstanding
188  issues, some patches may be modified or dropped or additional patches may
189  be queued. Additional -rc releases are then released and tested until no
190  issues are found.
191- Responding to the -rc releases can be done on the mailing list by sending
192  a "Tested-by:" email with any testing information desired. The "Tested-by:"
193  tags will be collected and added to the release commit.
194- At the end of the review cycle, the new -stable release will be released
195  containing all the queued and tested patches.
196- Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from the
197  security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle.
198  Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure.
199
200
201Trees
202-----
203
204- The queues of patches, for both completed versions and in progress
205  versions can be found at:
206
207    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git
208
209- The finalized and tagged releases of all stable kernels can be found
210  in separate branches per version at:
211
212    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git
213
214- The release candidate of all stable kernel versions can be found at:
215
216    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git/
217
218  .. warning::
219     The -stable-rc tree is a snapshot in time of the stable-queue tree and
220     will change frequently, hence will be rebased often. It should only be
221     used for testing purposes (e.g. to be consumed by CI systems).
222
223
224Review committee
225----------------
226
227- This is made up of a number of kernel developers who have volunteered for
228  this task, and a few that haven't.
229