Move _RET_IP_ and _THIS_IP_ to include/linux/kernel.h

[pandora-kernel.git] / Documentation / stable_kernel_rules.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt b/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
index 2c81305..4cfc788 100644 (file)
--- a/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
+++ b/Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt
@@ -1,58 +1,59 @@
 Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux 2.6 -stable releases.
 
 Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux 2.6 -stable releases.
 

-Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and what ones are not, into
-the "-stable" tree:
+Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the
+"-stable" tree:

 
  - It must be obviously correct and tested.
 
  - It must be obviously correct and tested.

- - It can not bigger than 100 lines, with context.
+ - It cannot be bigger than 100 lines, with context.

  - It must fix only one thing.
  - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a
  - It must fix only one thing.
  - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a

-   problem..." type thing.)
+   problem..." type thing).

  - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
    marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real
  - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things
    marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real

-   security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue.  In short,
-   something critical.
- - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how
-   the race can be exploited.
- - It can not contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
-   whitespace cleanups, etc.)
- - It must be accepted by the relevant subsystem maintainer.
- - It must follow Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules.
+   security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue.  In short, something
+   critical.
+ - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how the
+   race can be exploited is also provided.
+ - It cannot contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes,
+   whitespace cleanups, etc).
+ - It must follow the Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules.
+ - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree.  Quote the
+   respective commit ID in Linus' tree in your patch submission to -stable.

 
 
 Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree:
 
  - Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
    stable@kernel.org.
 
 
 Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree:
 
  - Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
    stable@kernel.org.

- - The sender will receive an ack when the patch has been accepted into
-   the queue, or a nak if the patch is rejected.  This response might
-   take a few days, according to the developer's schedules.
- - If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review
-   by other developers.
+ - The sender will receive an ACK when the patch has been accepted into the
+   queue, or a NAK if the patch is rejected.  This response might take a few
+   days, according to the developer's schedules.
+ - If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review by
+   other developers and by the relevant subsystem maintainer.
+ - If the stable@kernel.org address is added to a patch, when it goes into
+   Linus's tree it will automatically be emailed to the stable team.

  - Security patches should not be sent to this alias, but instead to the
  - Security patches should not be sent to this alias, but instead to the

-   documented security@kernel.org.
+   documented security@kernel.org address.

 
 
 Review cycle:
 
 
 
 Review cycle:
 

- - When the -stable maintainers decide for a review cycle, the patches
-   will be sent to the review committee, and the maintainer of the
-   affected area of the patch (unless the submitter is the maintainer of
-   the area) and CC: to the linux-kernel mailing list.
- - The review committee has 48 hours in which to ack or nak the patch.
+ - When the -stable maintainers decide for a review cycle, the patches will be
+   sent to the review committee, and the maintainer of the affected area of
+   the patch (unless the submitter is the maintainer of the area) and CC: to
+   the linux-kernel mailing list.
+ - The review committee has 48 hours in which to ACK or NAK the patch.

  - If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel
  - If the patch is rejected by a member of the committee, or linux-kernel

-   members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers
-   and members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the
-   queue.
- - At the end of the review cycle, the acked patches will be added to
-   the latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen.
- - Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from
-   the security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle.
+   members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers and
+   members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the queue.
+ - At the end of the review cycle, the ACKed patches will be added to the
+   latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen.
+ - Security patches will be accepted into the -stable tree directly from the
+   security kernel team, and not go through the normal review cycle.

    Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure.
 
 
    Contact the kernel security team for more details on this procedure.
 
 

-Review committe:
-
- - This will be made up of a number of kernel developers who have
-   volunteered for this task, and a few that haven't.
+Review committee:

 
 

+ - This is made up of a number of kernel developers who have volunteered for
+   this task, and a few that haven't.