cachepc-linux

Fork of AMDESE/linux with modifications for CachePC side-channel attack
git clone https://git.sinitax.com/sinitax/cachepc-linux
Log | Files | Refs | README | LICENSE | sfeed.txt

maintainer-entry-profile.rst (4407B)


      1.. _maintainerentryprofile:
      2
      3Maintainer Entry Profile
      4========================
      5
      6The Maintainer Entry Profile supplements the top-level process documents
      7(submitting-patches, submitting drivers...) with
      8subsystem/device-driver-local customs as well as details about the patch
      9submission life-cycle. A contributor uses this document to level set
     10their expectations and avoid common mistakes; maintainers may use these
     11profiles to look across subsystems for opportunities to converge on
     12common practices.
     13
     14
     15Overview
     16--------
     17Provide an introduction to how the subsystem operates. While MAINTAINERS
     18tells the contributor where to send patches for which files, it does not
     19convey other subsystem-local infrastructure and mechanisms that aid
     20development.
     21
     22Example questions to consider:
     23
     24- Are there notifications when patches are applied to the local tree, or
     25  merged upstream?
     26- Does the subsystem have a patchwork instance? Are patchwork state
     27  changes notified?
     28- Any bots or CI infrastructure that watches the list, or automated
     29  testing feedback that the subsystem uses to gate acceptance?
     30- Git branches that are pulled into -next?
     31- What branch should contributors submit against?
     32- Links to any other Maintainer Entry Profiles? For example a
     33  device-driver may point to an entry for its parent subsystem. This makes
     34  the contributor aware of obligations a maintainer may have for
     35  other maintainers in the submission chain.
     36
     37
     38Submit Checklist Addendum
     39-------------------------
     40List mandatory and advisory criteria, beyond the common "submit-checklist",
     41for a patch to be considered healthy enough for maintainer attention.
     42For example: "pass checkpatch.pl with no errors, or warning. Pass the
     43unit test detailed at $URI".
     44
     45The Submit Checklist Addendum can also include details about the status
     46of related hardware specifications. For example, does the subsystem
     47require published specifications at a certain revision before patches
     48will be considered.
     49
     50
     51Key Cycle Dates
     52---------------
     53One of the common misunderstandings of submitters is that patches can be
     54sent at any time before the merge window closes and can still be
     55considered for the next -rc1. The reality is that most patches need to
     56be settled in soaking in linux-next in advance of the merge window
     57opening. Clarify for the submitter the key dates (in terms of -rc release
     58week) that patches might be considered for merging and when patches need to
     59wait for the next -rc. At a minimum:
     60
     61- Last -rc for new feature submissions:
     62  New feature submissions targeting the next merge window should have
     63  their first posting for consideration before this point. Patches that
     64  are submitted after this point should be clear that they are targeting
     65  the NEXT+1 merge window, or should come with sufficient justification
     66  why they should be considered on an expedited schedule. A general
     67  guideline is to set expectation with contributors that new feature
     68  submissions should appear before -rc5.
     69
     70- Last -rc to merge features: Deadline for merge decisions
     71  Indicate to contributors the point at which an as yet un-applied patch
     72  set will need to wait for the NEXT+1 merge window. Of course there is no
     73  obligation to ever accept any given patchset, but if the review has not
     74  concluded by this point the expectation is the contributor should wait and
     75  resubmit for the following merge window.
     76
     77Optional:
     78
     79- First -rc at which the development baseline branch, listed in the
     80  overview section, should be considered ready for new submissions.
     81
     82
     83Review Cadence
     84--------------
     85One of the largest sources of contributor angst is how soon to ping
     86after a patchset has been posted without receiving any feedback. In
     87addition to specifying how long to wait before a resubmission this
     88section can also indicate a preferred style of update like, resend the
     89full series, or privately send a reminder email. This section might also
     90list how review works for this code area and methods to get feedback
     91that are not directly from the maintainer.
     92
     93Existing profiles
     94-----------------
     95
     96For now, existing maintainer profiles are listed here; we will likely want
     97to do something different in the near future.
     98
     99.. toctree::
    100   :maxdepth: 1
    101
    102   ../doc-guide/maintainer-profile
    103   ../nvdimm/maintainer-entry-profile
    104   ../riscv/patch-acceptance
    105   ../driver-api/media/maintainer-entry-profile
    106   ../driver-api/vfio-pci-device-specific-driver-acceptance