diff mbox series

[net] Documentation: netdev-FAQ: suggest how to post co-dependent series

Message ID 20201124235755.159903-1-kuba@kernel.org (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Delegated to: Netdev Maintainers
Headers show
Series [net] Documentation: netdev-FAQ: suggest how to post co-dependent series | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
netdev/cover_letter success Link
netdev/fixes_present fail Series targets non-next tree, but doesn't contain any Fixes tags
netdev/patch_count success Link
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for net
netdev/subject_prefix success Link
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/verify_signedoff success Link
netdev/module_param success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/verify_fixes success Link
netdev/checkpatch success total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 26 lines checked
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/header_inline success Link
netdev/stable success Stable not CCed

Commit Message

Jakub Kicinski Nov. 24, 2020, 11:57 p.m. UTC
Make an explicit suggestion how to post user space side of kernel
patches to avoid reposts when patchwork groups the wrong patches.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
---
 Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)

Comments

Florian Fainelli Nov. 25, 2020, 12:59 a.m. UTC | #1
On 11/24/2020 3:57 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Make an explicit suggestion how to post user space side of kernel
> patches to avoid reposts when patchwork groups the wrong patches.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>

Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>

The examples are good, that makes it pretty clear, thanks!
Alexei Starovoitov Nov. 25, 2020, 1:54 a.m. UTC | #2
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 4:08 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Make an explicit suggestion how to post user space side of kernel
> patches to avoid reposts when patchwork groups the wrong patches.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst b/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst
> index 21537766be4d..553eda8da9c7 100644
> --- a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst
> @@ -254,6 +254,26 @@ you will have done run-time testing specific to your change, but at a
>  minimum, your changes should survive an ``allyesconfig`` and an
>  ``allmodconfig`` build without new warnings or failures.
>
> +Q: How do I post corresponding changes to user space components?
> +----------------------------------------------------------------
> +A: Kernel patches often come with support in user space tooling
> +(e.g. `iproute2`). It's best to post both kernel and user space
> +code at the same time, so that reviewers have a chance to see how
> +user space side looks when reviewing kernel code.
> +If user space tooling lives in a separate repository kernel and user
> +space patches should form separate series (threads) when posted
> +to the mailing list, e.g.::
> +
> +  [PATCH net-next 0/3] net: some feature cover letter
> +   └─ [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: some feature prep
> +   └─ [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: some feature do it
> +   └─ [PATCH net-next 3/3] selftest: net: some feature
> +
> +  [PATCH iproute2-next] ip: add support for some feature

That's a good suggestion for iproute2 vs kernel patches
that actually live in separate repos.
When kernel and user components (like in often happens in bpf world)
happen to be in one repo it's better to keep them as a single patch set.
So it would be good to clarify in the above paragraph.

> +
> +Posting as one thread is discouraged because it confuses patchwork
> +(as of patchwork 2.2.2).

Right. Not as much patchwork, but kernel.org special email processing
pipeline that has an auto-delegation feature.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/infra/patchwork/procmail.git/tree/netdevbpf.rc
Not sure whether doc needs to go to this level of details.
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst b/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst
index 21537766be4d..553eda8da9c7 100644
--- a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst
+++ b/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst
@@ -254,6 +254,26 @@  you will have done run-time testing specific to your change, but at a
 minimum, your changes should survive an ``allyesconfig`` and an
 ``allmodconfig`` build without new warnings or failures.
 
+Q: How do I post corresponding changes to user space components?
+----------------------------------------------------------------
+A: Kernel patches often come with support in user space tooling
+(e.g. `iproute2`). It's best to post both kernel and user space
+code at the same time, so that reviewers have a chance to see how
+user space side looks when reviewing kernel code.
+If user space tooling lives in a separate repository kernel and user
+space patches should form separate series (threads) when posted
+to the mailing list, e.g.::
+
+  [PATCH net-next 0/3] net: some feature cover letter
+   └─ [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: some feature prep
+   └─ [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: some feature do it
+   └─ [PATCH net-next 3/3] selftest: net: some feature
+
+  [PATCH iproute2-next] ip: add support for some feature
+
+Posting as one thread is discouraged because it confuses patchwork
+(as of patchwork 2.2.2).
+
 Q: Any other tips to help ensure my net/net-next patch gets OK'd?
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
 A: Attention to detail.  Re-read your own work as if you were the