submitting-patches.rst 36.8 KB
Newer Older
.. _submittingpatches:
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

3 4
Submitting patches: the essential guide to getting your code into the kernel
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
5 6 7 8 9 10

For a person or company who wishes to submit a change to the Linux
kernel, the process can sometimes be daunting if you're not familiar
with "the system."  This text is a collection of suggestions which
can greatly increase the chances of your change being accepted.

11 12
This document contains a large number of suggestions in a relatively terse
format.  For detailed information on how the kernel development process
works, see :ref:`Documentation/process <development_process_main>`.
Also, read :ref:`Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst <submitchecklist>`
for a list of items to check before
submitting code.  If you are submitting a driver, also read
:ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-drivers.rst <submittingdrivers>`;
for device tree binding patches, read
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

21 22
Many of these steps describe the default behavior of the ``git`` version
control system; if you use ``git`` to prepare your patches, you'll find much
of the mechanical work done for you, though you'll still need to prepare
and document a sensible set of patches.  In general, use of ``git`` will make
your life as a kernel developer easier.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

27 28 29 30
0) Obtain a current source tree

If you do not have a repository with the current kernel source handy, use
``git`` to obtain one.  You'll want to start with the mainline repository,
which can be grabbed with::

  git clone git://
35 36 37

Note, however, that you may not want to develop against the mainline tree
directly.  Most subsystem maintainers run their own trees and want to see
patches prepared against those trees.  See the **T:** entry for the subsystem
39 40 41 42 43
in the MAINTAINERS file to find that tree, or simply ask the maintainer if
the tree is not listed there.

It is still possible to download kernel releases via tarballs (as described
in the next section), but that is the hard way to do kernel development.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

45 46
1) ``diff -up``
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

If you must generate your patches by hand, use ``diff -up`` or ``diff -uprN``
to create patches.  Git generates patches in this form by default; if
you're using ``git``, you can skip this section entirely.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
51 52

All changes to the Linux kernel occur in the form of patches, as
53 54 55
generated by :manpage:`diff(1)`.  When creating your patch, make sure to
create it in "unified diff" format, as supplied by the ``-u`` argument
to :manpage:`diff(1)`.
Also, please use the ``-p`` argument which shows which C function each
change is in - that makes the resultant ``diff`` a lot easier to read.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
58 59 60
Patches should be based in the root kernel source directory,
not in any lower subdirectory.

To create a patch for a single file, it is often sufficient to do::
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

	SRCTREE= linux
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72
	MYFILE=  drivers/net/mydriver.c

	cp $MYFILE $MYFILE.orig
	vi $MYFILE	# make your change
	cd ..
	diff -up $SRCTREE/$MYFILE{.orig,} > /tmp/patch

To create a patch for multiple files, you should unpack a "vanilla",
or unmodified kernel source tree, and generate a ``diff`` against your
own source tree.  For example::
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

	MYSRC= /devel/linux
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

78 79 80 81
	tar xvfz linux-3.19.tar.gz
	mv linux-3.19 linux-3.19-vanilla
	diff -uprN -X linux-3.19-vanilla/Documentation/dontdiff \
		linux-3.19-vanilla $MYSRC > /tmp/patch
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

``dontdiff`` is a list of files which are generated by the kernel during
the build process, and should be ignored in any :manpage:`diff(1)`-generated
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
86 87 88

Make sure your patch does not include any extra files which do not
belong in a patch submission.  Make sure to review your patch -after-
generating it with :manpage:`diff(1)`, to ensure accuracy.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

If your changes produce a lot of deltas, you need to split them into
92 93
individual patches which modify things in logical stages; see
:ref:`split_changes`.  This will facilitate review by other kernel developers,
very important if you want your patch accepted.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

96 97
If you're using ``git``, ``git rebase -i`` can help you with this process.  If
you're not using ``git``, ``quilt`` <>
is another popular alternative.

.. _describe_changes:

102 103
2) Describe your changes
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132
Describe your problem.  Whether your patch is a one-line bug fix or
5000 lines of a new feature, there must be an underlying problem that
motivated you to do this work.  Convince the reviewer that there is a
problem worth fixing and that it makes sense for them to read past the
first paragraph.

Describe user-visible impact.  Straight up crashes and lockups are
pretty convincing, but not all bugs are that blatant.  Even if the
problem was spotted during code review, describe the impact you think
it can have on users.  Keep in mind that the majority of Linux
installations run kernels from secondary stable trees or
vendor/product-specific trees that cherry-pick only specific patches
from upstream, so include anything that could help route your change
downstream: provoking circumstances, excerpts from dmesg, crash
descriptions, performance regressions, latency spikes, lockups, etc.

Quantify optimizations and trade-offs.  If you claim improvements in
performance, memory consumption, stack footprint, or binary size,
include numbers that back them up.  But also describe non-obvious
costs.  Optimizations usually aren't free but trade-offs between CPU,
memory, and readability; or, when it comes to heuristics, between
different workloads.  Describe the expected downsides of your
optimization so that the reviewer can weigh costs against benefits.

Once the problem is established, describe what you are actually doing
about it in technical detail.  It's important to describe the change
in plain English for the reviewer to verify that the code is behaving
as you intend it to.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

134 135
The maintainer will thank you if you write your patch description in a
form which can be easily pulled into Linux's source code management
system, ``git``, as a "commit log".  See :ref:`explicit_in_reply_to`.

138 139
Solve only one problem per patch.  If your description starts to get
long, that's a sign that you probably need to split up your patch.
See :ref:`split_changes`.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

142 143 144
When you submit or resubmit a patch or patch series, include the
complete patch description and justification for it.  Don't just
say that this is version N of the patch (series).  Don't expect the
subsystem maintainer to refer back to earlier patch versions or referenced
146 147
URLs to find the patch description and put that into the patch.
I.e., the patch (series) and its description should be self-contained.
This benefits both the maintainers and reviewers.  Some reviewers
149 150
probably didn't even receive earlier versions of the patch.

151 152 153 154 155
Describe your changes in imperative mood, e.g. "make xyzzy do frotz"
instead of "[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz" or "[I] changed xyzzy
to do frotz", as if you are giving orders to the codebase to change
its behaviour.

If the patch fixes a logged bug entry, refer to that bug entry by
157 158
number and URL.  If the patch follows from a mailing list discussion,
give a URL to the mailing list archive; use the
redirector with a ``Message-Id``, to ensure that the links cannot become
160 161 162 163 164 165

However, try to make your explanation understandable without external
resources.  In addition to giving a URL to a mailing list archive or
bug, summarize the relevant points of the discussion that led to the
patch as submitted.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

167 168 169
If you want to refer to a specific commit, don't just refer to the
SHA-1 ID of the commit. Please also include the oneline summary of
the commit, to make it easier for reviewers to know what it is about.
171 172 173 174 175 176

	Commit e21d2170f36602ae2708 ("video: remove unnecessary
	platform_set_drvdata()") removed the unnecessary
	platform_set_drvdata(), but left the variable "dev" unused,
	delete it.

177 178 179 180 181 182
You should also be sure to use at least the first twelve characters of the
SHA-1 ID.  The kernel repository holds a *lot* of objects, making
collisions with shorter IDs a real possibility.  Bear in mind that, even if
there is no collision with your six-character ID now, that condition may
change five years from now.

If your patch fixes a bug in a specific commit, e.g. you found an issue using
184 185
``git bisect``, please use the 'Fixes:' tag with the first 12 characters of
the SHA-1 ID, and the one line summary.  For example::
186 187 188

	Fixes: e21d2170f366 ("video: remove unnecessary platform_set_drvdata()")

189 190
The following ``git config`` settings can be used to add a pretty format for
outputting the above style in the ``git log`` or ``git show`` commands::
191 192 193 194 195

		abbrev = 12
		fixes = Fixes: %h (\"%s\")
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

197 198 199 200
.. _split_changes:

3) Separate your changes
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

Separate each **logical change** into a separate patch.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212

For example, if your changes include both bug fixes and performance
enhancements for a single driver, separate those changes into two
or more patches.  If your changes include an API update, and a new
driver which uses that new API, separate those into two patches.

On the other hand, if you make a single change to numerous files,
group those changes into a single patch.  Thus a single logical change
is contained within a single patch.

213 214 215 216
The point to remember is that each patch should make an easily understood
change that can be verified by reviewers.  Each patch should be justifiable
on its own merits.

Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
If one patch depends on another patch in order for a change to be
complete, that is OK.  Simply note **"this patch depends on patch X"**
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
219 220
in your patch description.

221 222
When dividing your change into a series of patches, take special care to
ensure that the kernel builds and runs properly after each patch in the
series.  Developers using ``git bisect`` to track down a problem can end up
224 225 226
splitting your patch series at any point; they will not thank you if you
introduce bugs in the middle.

227 228 229 230
If you cannot condense your patch set into a smaller set of patches,
then only post say 15 or so at a time and wait for review and integration.

Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

232 233
4) Style-check your changes
234 235

Check your patch for basic style violations, details of which can be
found in
:ref:`Documentation/process/coding-style.rst <codingstyle>`.
Failure to do so simply wastes
the reviewers time and will get your patch rejected, probably
240 241
without even being read.

242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252
One significant exception is when moving code from one file to
another -- in this case you should not modify the moved code at all in
the same patch which moves it.  This clearly delineates the act of
moving the code and your changes.  This greatly aids review of the
actual differences and allows tools to better track the history of
the code itself.

Check your patches with the patch style checker prior to submission
(scripts/  Note, though, that the style checker should be
viewed as a guide, not as a replacement for human judgment.  If your code
looks better with a violation then its probably best left alone.

254 255 256 257
The checker reports at three levels:
 - ERROR: things that are very likely to be wrong
 - WARNING: things requiring careful review
 - CHECK: things requiring thought

259 260
You should be able to justify all violations that remain in your
261 262

263 264
5) Select the recipients for your patch
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

266 267 268 269
You should always copy the appropriate subsystem maintainer(s) on any patch
to code that they maintain; look through the MAINTAINERS file and the
source code revision history to see who those maintainers are.  The
script scripts/ can be very useful at this step.  If you
cannot find a maintainer for the subsystem you are working on, Andrew
Morton ( serves as a maintainer of last resort.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

273 274 275 276 277 278
You should also normally choose at least one mailing list to receive a copy
of your patch set. functions as a list of
last resort, but the volume on that list has caused a number of developers
to tune it out.  Look in the MAINTAINERS file for a subsystem-specific
list; your patch will probably get more attention there.  Please do not
spam unrelated lists, though.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

280 281 282
Many kernel-related lists are hosted on; you can find a
list of them at  There are
kernel-related lists hosted elsewhere as well, though.
283 284 285

Do not send more than 15 patches at once to the vger mailing lists!!!

Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
Linus Torvalds is the final arbiter of all changes accepted into the
Linux kernel.  His e-mail address is <>.
288 289
He gets a lot of e-mail, and, at this point, very few patches go through
Linus directly, so typically you should do your best to -avoid-
sending him e-mail.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

292 293
If you have a patch that fixes an exploitable security bug, send that patch
to  For severe bugs, a short embargo may be considered
to allow distributors to get the patch out to users; in such cases,
obviously, the patch should not be sent to any public lists.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

Patches that fix a severe bug in a released kernel should be directed
toward the stable maintainers by putting a line like this::
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

into the sign-off area of your patch (note, NOT an email recipient).  You
should also read
:ref:`Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst <stable_kernel_rules>`
in addition to this file.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

307 308 309 310
Note, however, that some subsystem maintainers want to come to their own
conclusions on which patches should go to the stable trees.  The networking
maintainer, in particular, would rather not see individual developers
adding lines like the above to their patches.

312 313 314 315
If changes affect userland-kernel interfaces, please send the MAN-PAGES
maintainer (as listed in the MAINTAINERS file) a man-pages patch, or at
least a notification of the change, so that some information makes its way
into the manual pages.  User-space API changes should also be copied to
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
317 318

For small patches you may want to CC the Trivial Patch Monkey
319 320 which collects "trivial" patches. Have a look
into the MAINTAINERS file for its current manager.

Trivial patches must qualify for one of the following rules:

324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334
- Spelling fixes in documentation
- Spelling fixes for errors which could break :manpage:`grep(1)`
- Warning fixes (cluttering with useless warnings is bad)
- Compilation fixes (only if they are actually correct)
- Runtime fixes (only if they actually fix things)
- Removing use of deprecated functions/macros
- Contact detail and documentation fixes
- Non-portable code replaced by portable code (even in arch-specific,
  since people copy, as long as it's trivial)
- Any fix by the author/maintainer of the file (ie. patch monkey
  in re-transmission mode)

Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
336 337

338 339
6) No MIME, no links, no compression, no attachments.  Just plain text
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
340 341 342 343 344 345

Linus and other kernel developers need to be able to read and comment
on the changes you are submitting.  It is important for a kernel
developer to be able to "quote" your changes, using standard e-mail
tools, so that they may comment on specific portions of your code.

For this reason, all patches should be submitted by e-mail "inline".
347 348 349 350 351

.. warning::

  Be wary of your editor's word-wrap corrupting your patch,
  if you choose to cut-n-paste your patch.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361

Do not attach the patch as a MIME attachment, compressed or not.
Many popular e-mail applications will not always transmit a MIME
attachment as plain text, making it impossible to comment on your
code.  A MIME attachment also takes Linus a bit more time to process,
decreasing the likelihood of your MIME-attached change being accepted.

Exception:  If your mailer is mangling patches then someone may ask
you to re-send them using MIME.

See :ref:`Documentation/process/email-clients.rst <email_clients>`
363 364
for hints about configuring your e-mail client so that it sends your patches
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

366 367
7) E-mail size
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
368 369

Large changes are not appropriate for mailing lists, and some
maintainers.  If your patch, uncompressed, exceeds 300 kB in size,
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
it is preferred that you store your patch on an Internet-accessible
372 373 374
server, and provide instead a URL (link) pointing to your patch.  But note
that if your patch exceeds 300 kB, it almost certainly needs to be broken up
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

376 377
8) Respond to review comments
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

379 380 381 382 383 384
Your patch will almost certainly get comments from reviewers on ways in
which the patch can be improved.  You must respond to those comments;
ignoring reviewers is a good way to get ignored in return.  Review comments
or questions that do not lead to a code change should almost certainly
bring about a comment or changelog entry so that the next reviewer better
understands what is going on.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

386 387 388 389
Be sure to tell the reviewers what changes you are making and to thank them
for their time.  Code review is a tiring and time-consuming process, and
reviewers sometimes get grumpy.  Even in that case, though, respond
politely and address the problems they have pointed out.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
390 391

392 393
9) Don't get discouraged - or impatient
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

395 396
After you have submitted your change, be patient and wait.  Reviewers are
busy people and may not get to your patch right away.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

398 399 400 401 402 403
Once upon a time, patches used to disappear into the void without comment,
but the development process works more smoothly than that now.  You should
receive comments within a week or so; if that does not happen, make sure
that you have sent your patches to the right place.  Wait for a minimum of
one week before resubmitting or pinging reviewers - possibly longer during
busy times like merge windows.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
404 405

10) Include PATCH in the subject
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415

Due to high e-mail traffic to Linus, and to linux-kernel, it is common
convention to prefix your subject line with [PATCH].  This lets Linus
and other kernel developers more easily distinguish patches from other
e-mail discussions.

11) Sign your work - the Developer's Certificate of Origin
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425

To improve tracking of who did what, especially with patches that can
percolate to their final resting place in the kernel through several
layers of maintainers, we've introduced a "sign-off" procedure on
patches that are being emailed around.

The sign-off is a simple line at the end of the explanation for the
patch, which certifies that you wrote it or otherwise have the right to
pass it on as an open-source patch.  The rules are pretty simple: if you
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
427 428
can certify the below:

429 430
Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449

        (a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
            have the right to submit it under the open source license
            indicated in the file; or

        (b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
            of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
            license and I have the right under that license to submit that
            work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
            by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
            permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
            in the file; or

        (c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
            person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified

450 451 452 453 454
        (d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
            are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
            personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
            maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
            this project or the open source license(s) involved.

then you just add a line saying::
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

	Signed-off-by: Random J Developer <>
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

460 461
using your real name (sorry, no pseudonyms or anonymous contributions.)

Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed
462 463
Some people also put extra tags at the end.  They'll just be ignored for
now, but you can do this to mark internal company procedures or just
point out some special detail about the sign-off.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476
If you are a subsystem or branch maintainer, sometimes you need to slightly
modify patches you receive in order to merge them, because the code is not
exactly the same in your tree and the submitters'. If you stick strictly to
rule (c), you should ask the submitter to rediff, but this is a totally
counter-productive waste of time and energy. Rule (b) allows you to adjust
the code, but then it is very impolite to change one submitter's code and
make him endorse your bugs. To solve this problem, it is recommended that
you add a line between the last Signed-off-by header and yours, indicating
the nature of your changes. While there is nothing mandatory about this, it
seems like prepending the description with your mail and/or name, all
enclosed in square brackets, is noticeable enough to make it obvious that
you are responsible for last-minute changes. Example::
478 479 480 481 482

	Signed-off-by: Random J Developer <>
	[ struct foo moved from foo.c to foo.h]
	Signed-off-by: Lucky K Maintainer <>

This practice is particularly helpful if you maintain a stable branch and
484 485 486 487 488
want at the same time to credit the author, track changes, merge the fix,
and protect the submitter from complaints. Note that under no circumstances
can you change the author's identity (the From header), as it is the one
which appears in the changelog.

Special note to back-porters: It seems to be a common and useful practice
490 491
to insert an indication of the origin of a patch at the top of the commit
message (just after the subject line) to facilitate tracking. For instance,
here's what we see in a 3.x-stable release::

  Date:   Tue Oct 7 07:26:38 2014 -0400

    libata: Un-break ATA blacklist

    commit 1c40279960bcd7d52dbdf1d466b20d24b99176c8 upstream.

And here's what might appear in an older kernel once a patch is backported::
501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508

    Date:   Tue May 13 22:12:27 2008 +0200

        wireless, airo: waitbusy() won't delay

        [backport of 2.6 commit b7acbdfbd1f277c1eb23f344f899cfa4cd0bf36a]

Whatever the format, this information provides a valuable help to people
tracking your trees, and to people trying to troubleshoot bugs in your
510 511

Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

12) When to use Acked-by:, Cc:, and Co-developed-by:

Andrew Morton's avatar
Andrew Morton committed
516 517 518 519 520
The Signed-off-by: tag indicates that the signer was involved in the
development of the patch, or that he/she was in the patch's delivery path.

If a person was not directly involved in the preparation or handling of a
patch but wishes to signify and record their approval of it then they can
ask to have an Acked-by: line added to the patch's changelog.
Andrew Morton's avatar
Andrew Morton committed
522 523 524 525 526 527 528

Acked-by: is often used by the maintainer of the affected code when that
maintainer neither contributed to nor forwarded the patch.

Acked-by: is not as formal as Signed-off-by:.  It is a record that the acker
has at least reviewed the patch and has indicated acceptance.  Hence patch
mergers will sometimes manually convert an acker's "yep, looks good to me"
529 530
into an Acked-by: (but note that it is usually better to ask for an
explicit ack).
Andrew Morton's avatar
Andrew Morton committed
531 532 533 534 535

Acked-by: does not necessarily indicate acknowledgement of the entire patch.
For example, if a patch affects multiple subsystems and has an Acked-by: from
one subsystem maintainer then this usually indicates acknowledgement of just
the part which affects that maintainer's code.  Judgement should be used here.
When in doubt people should refer to the original discussion in the mailing
Andrew Morton's avatar
Andrew Morton committed
537 538
list archives.

If a person has had the opportunity to comment on a patch, but has not
provided such comments, you may optionally add a ``Cc:`` tag to the patch.
This is the only tag which might be added without an explicit action by the
542 543 544
person it names - but it should indicate that this person was copied on the
patch.  This tag documents that potentially interested parties
have been included in the discussion.
Andrew Morton's avatar
Andrew Morton committed

A Co-developed-by: states that the patch was also created by another developer
547 548 549 550
along with the original author.  This is useful at times when multiple people
work on a single patch.  Note, this person also needs to have a Signed-off-by:
line in the patch as well.


13) Using Reported-by:, Tested-by:, Reviewed-by:, Suggested-by: and Fixes:

555 556 557 558
The Reported-by tag gives credit to people who find bugs and report them and it
hopefully inspires them to help us again in the future.  Please note that if
the bug was reported in private, then ask for permission first before using the
Reported-by tag.
559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567

A Tested-by: tag indicates that the patch has been successfully tested (in
some environment) by the person named.  This tag informs maintainers that
some testing has been performed, provides a means to locate testers for
future patches, and ensures credit for the testers.

Reviewed-by:, instead, indicates that the patch has been reviewed and found
acceptable according to the Reviewer's Statement:

568 569
Reviewer's statement of oversight

By offering my Reviewed-by: tag, I state that:

	 (a) I have carried out a technical review of this patch to
574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597
	     evaluate its appropriateness and readiness for inclusion into
	     the mainline kernel.

	 (b) Any problems, concerns, or questions relating to the patch
	     have been communicated back to the submitter.  I am satisfied
	     with the submitter's response to my comments.

	 (c) While there may be things that could be improved with this
	     submission, I believe that it is, at this time, (1) a
	     worthwhile modification to the kernel, and (2) free of known
	     issues which would argue against its inclusion.

	 (d) While I have reviewed the patch and believe it to be sound, I
	     do not (unless explicitly stated elsewhere) make any
	     warranties or guarantees that it will achieve its stated
	     purpose or function properly in any given situation.

A Reviewed-by tag is a statement of opinion that the patch is an
appropriate modification of the kernel without any remaining serious
technical issues.  Any interested reviewer (who has done the work) can
offer a Reviewed-by tag for a patch.  This tag serves to give credit to
reviewers and to inform maintainers of the degree of review which has been
done on the patch.  Reviewed-by: tags, when supplied by reviewers known to
understand the subject area and to perform thorough reviews, will normally
Pavel Machek's avatar
Pavel Machek committed
increase the likelihood of your patch getting into the kernel.

600 601 602 603 604 605 606
A Suggested-by: tag indicates that the patch idea is suggested by the person
named and ensures credit to the person for the idea. Please note that this
tag should not be added without the reporter's permission, especially if the
idea was not posted in a public forum. That said, if we diligently credit our
idea reporters, they will, hopefully, be inspired to help us again in the

607 608 609 610
A Fixes: tag indicates that the patch fixes an issue in a previous commit. It
is used to make it easy to determine where a bug originated, which can help
review a bug fix. This tag also assists the stable kernel team in determining
which stable kernel versions should receive your fix. This is the preferred
611 612
method for indicating a bug fixed by the patch. See :ref:`describe_changes`
for more details.

.. _the_canonical_patch_format:

14) The canonical patch format
617 618 619

This section describes how the patch itself should be formatted.  Note
that, if you have your patches stored in a ``git`` repository, proper patch
formatting can be had with ``git format-patch``.  The tools cannot create
the necessary text, though, so read the instructions below anyway.

The canonical patch subject line is::

    Subject: [PATCH 001/123] subsystem: summary phrase
627 628 629

The canonical patch message body contains the following:

630 631
  - A ``from`` line specifying the patch author, followed by an empty
    line (only needed if the person sending the patch is not the author).

633 634
  - The body of the explanation, line wrapped at 75 columns, which will
    be copied to the permanent changelog to describe this patch.

636 637
  - An empty line.

  - The ``Signed-off-by:`` lines, described above, which will
639 640
    also go in the changelog.

  - A marker line containing simply ``---``.
642 643 644

  - Any additional comments not suitable for the changelog.

  - The actual patch (``diff`` output).
646 647 648 649 650 651

The Subject line format makes it very easy to sort the emails
alphabetically by subject line - pretty much any email reader will
support that - since because the sequence number is zero-padded,
the numerical and alphabetic sort is the same.

The ``subsystem`` in the email's Subject should identify which
653 654
area or subsystem of the kernel is being patched.

655 656 657 658 659
The ``summary phrase`` in the email's Subject should concisely
describe the patch which that email contains.  The ``summary
phrase`` should not be a filename.  Do not use the same ``summary
phrase`` for every patch in a whole patch series (where a ``patch
series`` is an ordered sequence of multiple, related patches).

Bear in mind that the ``summary phrase`` of your email becomes a
globally-unique identifier for that patch.  It propagates all the way
into the ``git`` changelog.  The ``summary phrase`` may later be used in
developer discussions which refer to the patch.  People will want to
google for the ``summary phrase`` to read discussion regarding that
666 667
patch.  It will also be the only thing that people may quickly see
when, two or three months later, they are going through perhaps
668 669
thousands of patches using tools such as ``gitk`` or ``git log

For these reasons, the ``summary`` must be no more than 70-75
672 673 674 675 676
characters, and it must describe both what the patch changes, as well
as why the patch might be necessary.  It is challenging to be both
succinct and descriptive, but that is what a well-written summary
should do.

The ``summary phrase`` may be prefixed by tags enclosed in square
678 679
brackets: "Subject: [PATCH <tag>...] <summary phrase>".  The tags are
not considered part of the summary phrase, but describe how the patch
680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687
should be treated.  Common tags might include a version descriptor if
the multiple versions of the patch have been sent out in response to
comments (i.e., "v1, v2, v3"), or "RFC" to indicate a request for
comments.  If there are four patches in a patch series the individual
patches may be numbered like this: 1/4, 2/4, 3/4, 4/4.  This assures
that developers understand the order in which the patches should be
applied and that they have reviewed or applied all of the patches in
the patch series.

A couple of example Subjects::

691 692
    Subject: [PATCH 2/5] ext2: improve scalability of bitmap searching
    Subject: [PATCH v2 01/27] x86: fix eflags tracking

The ``from`` line must be the very first line in the message body,
695 696 697 698
and has the form:

        From: Original Author <>

699 700 701
The ``from`` line specifies who will be credited as the author of the
patch in the permanent changelog.  If the ``from`` line is missing,
then the ``From:`` line from the email header will be used to determine
702 703 704 705 706
the patch author in the changelog.

The explanation body will be committed to the permanent source
changelog, so should make sense to a competent reader who has long
since forgotten the immediate details of the discussion that might
707 708 709 710 711 712
have led to this patch.  Including symptoms of the failure which the
patch addresses (kernel log messages, oops messages, etc.) is
especially useful for people who might be searching the commit logs
looking for the applicable patch.  If a patch fixes a compile failure,
it may not be necessary to include _all_ of the compile failures; just
enough that it is likely that someone searching for the patch can find
it.  As in the ``summary phrase``, it is important to be both succinct as
well as descriptive.

The ``---`` marker line serves the essential purpose of marking for patch
717 718
handling tools where the changelog message ends.

One good use for the additional comments after the ``---`` marker is for
720 721
a ``diffstat``, to show what files have changed, and the number of
inserted and deleted lines per file.  A ``diffstat`` is especially useful
722 723
on bigger patches.  Other comments relevant only to the moment or the
maintainer, not suitable for the permanent changelog, should also go
here.  A good example of such comments might be ``patch changelogs``
725 726 727
which describe what has changed between the v1 and v2 version of the

728 729
If you are going to include a ``diffstat`` after the ``---`` marker, please
use ``diffstat`` options ``-p 1 -w 70`` so that filenames are listed from
the top of the kernel source tree and don't use too much horizontal
space (easily fit in 80 columns, maybe with some indentation).  (``git``
generates appropriate diffstats by default.)
733 734 735 736

See more details on the proper patch format in the following

737 738
.. _explicit_in_reply_to:

739 740 741 742
15) Explicit In-Reply-To headers

It can be helpful to manually add In-Reply-To: headers to a patch
(e.g., when using ``git send-email``) to associate the patch with
744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751
previous relevant discussion, e.g. to link a bug fix to the email with
the bug report.  However, for a multi-patch series, it is generally
best to avoid using In-Reply-To: to link to older versions of the
series.  This way multiple versions of the patch don't become an
unmanageable forest of references in email clients.  If a link is
helpful, you can use the redirector (e.g., in
the cover email text) to link to an earlier version of the patch series.


753 754
16) Sending ``git pull`` requests
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

756 757
If you have a series of patches, it may be most convenient to have the
maintainer pull them directly into the subsystem repository with a
``git pull`` operation.  Note, however, that pulling patches from a developer
759 760
requires a higher degree of trust than taking patches from a mailing list.
As a result, many subsystem maintainers are reluctant to take pull
761 762 763
requests, especially from new, unknown developers.  If in doubt you can use
the pull request as the cover letter for a normal posting of the patch
series, giving the maintainer the option of using either.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

A pull request should have [GIT PULL] in the subject line.  The
request itself should include the repository name and the branch of
interest on a single line; it should look something like::
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

  Please pull from
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

      git:// i2c-for-linus
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

  to get these changes:
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

A pull request should also include an overall message saying what will be
included in the request, a ``git shortlog`` listing of the patches
themselves, and a ``diffstat`` showing the overall effect of the patch series.
The easiest way to get all this information together is, of course, to let
``git`` do it for you with the ``git request-pull`` command.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

781 782 783 784
Some maintainers (including Linus) want to see pull requests from signed
commits; that increases their confidence that the request actually came
from you.  Linus, in particular, will not pull from public hosting sites
like GitHub in the absence of a signed tag.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

786 787 788 789
The first step toward creating such tags is to make a GNUPG key and get it
signed by one or more core kernel developers.  This step can be hard for
new developers, but there is no way around it.  Attending conferences can
be a good way to find developers who can sign your key.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

Once you have prepared a patch series in ``git`` that you wish to have somebody
pull, create a signed tag with ``git tag -s``.  This will create a new tag
793 794 795 796
identifying the last commit in the series and containing a signature
created with your private key.  You will also have the opportunity to add a
changelog-style message to the tag; this is an ideal place to describe the
effects of the pull request as a whole.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

798 799 800
If the tree the maintainer will be pulling from is not the repository you
are working from, don't forget to push the signed tag explicitly to the
public tree.
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

When generating your pull request, use the signed tag as the target.  A
command like this will do the trick::
Linus Torvalds's avatar
Linus Torvalds committed

  git request-pull master git://my.public.tree/linux.git my-signed-tag
806 807

808 809
810 811

Andrew Morton, "The perfect patch" (tpp).

Jeff Garzik, "Linux kernel patch submission format".
815 816

Greg Kroah-Hartman, "How to piss off a kernel subsystem maintainer".






NO!!!! No more huge patch bombs to people!

833 834
Kernel Documentation/process/coding-style.rst:
  :ref:`Documentation/process/coding-style.rst <codingstyle>`

Linus Torvalds's mail on the canonical patch format:
838 839

Andi Kleen, "On submitting kernel patches"
Lucas De Marchi's avatar
Lucas De Marchi committed
  Some strategies to get difficult or controversial changes in.