diff options
Diffstat (limited to '')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/process/howto.rst | 627 |
1 files changed, 627 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/process/howto.rst b/Documentation/process/howto.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000..20c9e07e0 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/process/howto.rst @@ -0,0 +1,627 @@ +.. _process_howto: + +HOWTO do Linux kernel development +================================= + +This is the be-all, end-all document on this topic. It contains +instructions on how to become a Linux kernel developer and how to learn +to work with the Linux kernel development community. It tries to not +contain anything related to the technical aspects of kernel programming, +but will help point you in the right direction for that. + +If anything in this document becomes out of date, please send in patches +to the maintainer of this file, who is listed at the bottom of the +document. + + +Introduction +------------ + +So, you want to learn how to become a Linux kernel developer? Or you +have been told by your manager, "Go write a Linux driver for this +device." This document's goal is to teach you everything you need to +know to achieve this by describing the process you need to go through, +and hints on how to work with the community. It will also try to +explain some of the reasons why the community works like it does. + +The kernel is written mostly in C, with some architecture-dependent +parts written in assembly. A good understanding of C is required for +kernel development. Assembly (any architecture) is not required unless +you plan to do low-level development for that architecture. Though they +are not a good substitute for a solid C education and/or years of +experience, the following books are good for, if anything, reference: + + - "The C Programming Language" by Kernighan and Ritchie [Prentice Hall] + - "Practical C Programming" by Steve Oualline [O'Reilly] + - "C: A Reference Manual" by Harbison and Steele [Prentice Hall] + +The kernel is written using GNU C and the GNU toolchain. While it +adheres to the ISO C89 standard, it uses a number of extensions that are +not featured in the standard. The kernel is a freestanding C +environment, with no reliance on the standard C library, so some +portions of the C standard are not supported. Arbitrary long long +divisions and floating point are not allowed. It can sometimes be +difficult to understand the assumptions the kernel has on the toolchain +and the extensions that it uses, and unfortunately there is no +definitive reference for them. Please check the gcc info pages (`info +gcc`) for some information on them. + +Please remember that you are trying to learn how to work with the +existing development community. It is a diverse group of people, with +high standards for coding, style and procedure. These standards have +been created over time based on what they have found to work best for +such a large and geographically dispersed team. Try to learn as much as +possible about these standards ahead of time, as they are well +documented; do not expect people to adapt to you or your company's way +of doing things. + + +Legal Issues +------------ + +The Linux kernel source code is released under the GPL. Please see the file +COPYING in the main directory of the source tree. The Linux kernel licensing +rules and how to use `SPDX <https://spdx.org/>`_ identifiers in source code are +described in :ref:`Documentation/process/license-rules.rst <kernel_licensing>`. +If you have further questions about the license, please contact a lawyer, and do +not ask on the Linux kernel mailing list. The people on the mailing lists are +not lawyers, and you should not rely on their statements on legal matters. + +For common questions and answers about the GPL, please see: + + https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html + + +Documentation +------------- + +The Linux kernel source tree has a large range of documents that are +invaluable for learning how to interact with the kernel community. When +new features are added to the kernel, it is recommended that new +documentation files are also added which explain how to use the feature. +When a kernel change causes the interface that the kernel exposes to +userspace to change, it is recommended that you send the information or +a patch to the manual pages explaining the change to the manual pages +maintainer at mtk.manpages@gmail.com, and CC the list +linux-api@vger.kernel.org. + +Here is a list of files that are in the kernel source tree that are +required reading: + + :ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/README.rst <readme>` + This file gives a short background on the Linux kernel and describes + what is necessary to do to configure and build the kernel. People + who are new to the kernel should start here. + + :ref:`Documentation/process/changes.rst <changes>` + This file gives a list of the minimum levels of various software + packages that are necessary to build and run the kernel + successfully. + + :ref:`Documentation/process/coding-style.rst <codingstyle>` + This describes the Linux kernel coding style, and some of the + rationale behind it. All new code is expected to follow the + guidelines in this document. Most maintainers will only accept + patches if these rules are followed, and many people will only + review code if it is in the proper style. + + :ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <submittingpatches>` and :ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-drivers.rst <submittingdrivers>` + These files describe in explicit detail how to successfully create + and send a patch, including (but not limited to): + + - Email contents + - Email format + - Who to send it to + + Following these rules will not guarantee success (as all patches are + subject to scrutiny for content and style), but not following them + will almost always prevent it. + + Other excellent descriptions of how to create patches properly are: + + "The Perfect Patch" + https://www.ozlabs.org/~akpm/stuff/tpp.txt + + "Linux kernel patch submission format" + https://web.archive.org/web/20180829112450/http://linux.yyz.us/patch-format.html + + :ref:`Documentation/process/stable-api-nonsense.rst <stable_api_nonsense>` + This file describes the rationale behind the conscious decision to + not have a stable API within the kernel, including things like: + + - Subsystem shim-layers (for compatibility?) + - Driver portability between Operating Systems. + - Mitigating rapid change within the kernel source tree (or + preventing rapid change) + + This document is crucial for understanding the Linux development + philosophy and is very important for people moving to Linux from + development on other Operating Systems. + + :ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/security-bugs.rst <securitybugs>` + If you feel you have found a security problem in the Linux kernel, + please follow the steps in this document to help notify the kernel + developers, and help solve the issue. + + :ref:`Documentation/process/management-style.rst <managementstyle>` + This document describes how Linux kernel maintainers operate and the + shared ethos behind their methodologies. This is important reading + for anyone new to kernel development (or anyone simply curious about + it), as it resolves a lot of common misconceptions and confusion + about the unique behavior of kernel maintainers. + + :ref:`Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst <stable_kernel_rules>` + This file describes the rules on how the stable kernel releases + happen, and what to do if you want to get a change into one of these + releases. + + :ref:`Documentation/process/kernel-docs.rst <kernel_docs>` + A list of external documentation that pertains to kernel + development. Please consult this list if you do not find what you + are looking for within the in-kernel documentation. + + :ref:`Documentation/process/applying-patches.rst <applying_patches>` + A good introduction describing exactly what a patch is and how to + apply it to the different development branches of the kernel. + +The kernel also has a large number of documents that can be +automatically generated from the source code itself or from +ReStructuredText markups (ReST), like this one. This includes a +full description of the in-kernel API, and rules on how to handle +locking properly. + +All such documents can be generated as PDF or HTML by running:: + + make pdfdocs + make htmldocs + +respectively from the main kernel source directory. + +The documents that uses ReST markup will be generated at Documentation/output. +They can also be generated on LaTeX and ePub formats with:: + + make latexdocs + make epubdocs + +Becoming A Kernel Developer +--------------------------- + +If you do not know anything about Linux kernel development, you should +look at the Linux KernelNewbies project: + + https://kernelnewbies.org + +It consists of a helpful mailing list where you can ask almost any type +of basic kernel development question (make sure to search the archives +first, before asking something that has already been answered in the +past.) It also has an IRC channel that you can use to ask questions in +real-time, and a lot of helpful documentation that is useful for +learning about Linux kernel development. + +The website has basic information about code organization, subsystems, +and current projects (both in-tree and out-of-tree). It also describes +some basic logistical information, like how to compile a kernel and +apply a patch. + +If you do not know where you want to start, but you want to look for +some task to start doing to join into the kernel development community, +go to the Linux Kernel Janitor's project: + + https://kernelnewbies.org/KernelJanitors + +It is a great place to start. It describes a list of relatively simple +problems that need to be cleaned up and fixed within the Linux kernel +source tree. Working with the developers in charge of this project, you +will learn the basics of getting your patch into the Linux kernel tree, +and possibly be pointed in the direction of what to go work on next, if +you do not already have an idea. + +Before making any actual modifications to the Linux kernel code, it is +imperative to understand how the code in question works. For this +purpose, nothing is better than reading through it directly (most tricky +bits are commented well), perhaps even with the help of specialized +tools. One such tool that is particularly recommended is the Linux +Cross-Reference project, which is able to present source code in a +self-referential, indexed webpage format. An excellent up-to-date +repository of the kernel code may be found at: + + https://elixir.bootlin.com/ + + +The development process +----------------------- + +Linux kernel development process currently consists of a few different +main kernel "branches" and lots of different subsystem-specific kernel +branches. These different branches are: + + - Linus's mainline tree + - Various stable trees with multiple major numbers + - Subsystem-specific trees + - linux-next integration testing tree + +Mainline tree +~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +The mainline tree is maintained by Linus Torvalds, and can be found at +https://kernel.org or in the repo. Its development process is as follows: + + - As soon as a new kernel is released a two week window is open, + during this period of time maintainers can submit big diffs to + Linus, usually the patches that have already been included in the + linux-next for a few weeks. The preferred way to submit big changes + is using git (the kernel's source management tool, more information + can be found at https://git-scm.com/) but plain patches are also just + fine. + - After two weeks a -rc1 kernel is released and the focus is on making the + new kernel as rock solid as possible. Most of the patches at this point + should fix a regression. Bugs that have always existed are not + regressions, so only push these kinds of fixes if they are important. + Please note that a whole new driver (or filesystem) might be accepted + after -rc1 because there is no risk of causing regressions with such a + change as long as the change is self-contained and does not affect areas + outside of the code that is being added. git can be used to send + patches to Linus after -rc1 is released, but the patches need to also be + sent to a public mailing list for review. + - A new -rc is released whenever Linus deems the current git tree to + be in a reasonably sane state adequate for testing. The goal is to + release a new -rc kernel every week. + - Process continues until the kernel is considered "ready", the + process should last around 6 weeks. + +It is worth mentioning what Andrew Morton wrote on the linux-kernel +mailing list about kernel releases: + + *"Nobody knows when a kernel will be released, because it's + released according to perceived bug status, not according to a + preconceived timeline."* + +Various stable trees with multiple major numbers +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +Kernels with 3-part versions are -stable kernels. They contain +relatively small and critical fixes for security problems or significant +regressions discovered in a given major mainline release. Each release +in a major stable series increments the third part of the version +number, keeping the first two parts the same. + +This is the recommended branch for users who want the most recent stable +kernel and are not interested in helping test development/experimental +versions. + +Stable trees are maintained by the "stable" team <stable@vger.kernel.org>, and +are released as needs dictate. The normal release period is approximately +two weeks, but it can be longer if there are no pressing problems. A +security-related problem, instead, can cause a release to happen almost +instantly. + +The file :ref:`Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst <stable_kernel_rules>` +in the kernel tree documents what kinds of changes are acceptable for +the -stable tree, and how the release process works. + +Subsystem-specific trees +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +The maintainers of the various kernel subsystems --- and also many +kernel subsystem developers --- expose their current state of +development in source repositories. That way, others can see what is +happening in the different areas of the kernel. In areas where +development is rapid, a developer may be asked to base his submissions +onto such a subsystem kernel tree so that conflicts between the +submission and other already ongoing work are avoided. + +Most of these repositories are git trees, but there are also other SCMs +in use, or patch queues being published as quilt series. Addresses of +these subsystem repositories are listed in the MAINTAINERS file. Many +of them can be browsed at https://git.kernel.org/. + +Before a proposed patch is committed to such a subsystem tree, it is +subject to review which primarily happens on mailing lists (see the +respective section below). For several kernel subsystems, this review +process is tracked with the tool patchwork. Patchwork offers a web +interface which shows patch postings, any comments on a patch or +revisions to it, and maintainers can mark patches as under review, +accepted, or rejected. Most of these patchwork sites are listed at +https://patchwork.kernel.org/. + +linux-next integration testing tree +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ + +Before updates from subsystem trees are merged into the mainline tree, +they need to be integration-tested. For this purpose, a special +testing repository exists into which virtually all subsystem trees are +pulled on an almost daily basis: + + https://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git + +This way, the linux-next gives a summary outlook onto what will be +expected to go into the mainline kernel at the next merge period. +Adventurous testers are very welcome to runtime-test the linux-next. + + +Bug Reporting +------------- + +https://bugzilla.kernel.org is where the Linux kernel developers track kernel +bugs. Users are encouraged to report all bugs that they find in this +tool. For details on how to use the kernel bugzilla, please see: + + https://bugzilla.kernel.org/page.cgi?id=faq.html + +The file :ref:`admin-guide/reporting-bugs.rst <reportingbugs>` +in the main kernel source directory has a good +template for how to report a possible kernel bug, and details what kind +of information is needed by the kernel developers to help track down the +problem. + + +Managing bug reports +-------------------- + +One of the best ways to put into practice your hacking skills is by fixing +bugs reported by other people. Not only you will help to make the kernel +more stable, but you'll also learn to fix real world problems and you will +improve your skills, and other developers will be aware of your presence. +Fixing bugs is one of the best ways to get merits among other developers, +because not many people like wasting time fixing other people's bugs. + +To work in the already reported bug reports, go to https://bugzilla.kernel.org. + + +Mailing lists +------------- + +As some of the above documents describe, the majority of the core kernel +developers participate on the Linux Kernel Mailing list. Details on how +to subscribe and unsubscribe from the list can be found at: + + http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#linux-kernel + +There are archives of the mailing list on the web in many different +places. Use a search engine to find these archives. For example: + + http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel + +It is highly recommended that you search the archives about the topic +you want to bring up, before you post it to the list. A lot of things +already discussed in detail are only recorded at the mailing list +archives. + +Most of the individual kernel subsystems also have their own separate +mailing list where they do their development efforts. See the +MAINTAINERS file for a list of what these lists are for the different +groups. + +Many of the lists are hosted on kernel.org. Information on them can be +found at: + + http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html + +Please remember to follow good behavioral habits when using the lists. +Though a bit cheesy, the following URL has some simple guidelines for +interacting with the list (or any list): + + http://www.albion.com/netiquette/ + +If multiple people respond to your mail, the CC: list of recipients may +get pretty large. Don't remove anybody from the CC: list without a good +reason, or don't reply only to the list address. Get used to receiving the +mail twice, one from the sender and the one from the list, and don't try +to tune that by adding fancy mail-headers, people will not like it. + +Remember to keep the context and the attribution of your replies intact, +keep the "John Kernelhacker wrote ...:" lines at the top of your reply, and +add your statements between the individual quoted sections instead of +writing at the top of the mail. + +If you add patches to your mail, make sure they are plain readable text +as stated in :ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <submittingpatches>`. +Kernel developers don't want to deal with +attachments or compressed patches; they may want to comment on +individual lines of your patch, which works only that way. Make sure you +use a mail program that does not mangle spaces and tab characters. A +good first test is to send the mail to yourself and try to apply your +own patch by yourself. If that doesn't work, get your mail program fixed +or change it until it works. + +Above all, please remember to show respect to other subscribers. + + +Working with the community +-------------------------- + +The goal of the kernel community is to provide the best possible kernel +there is. When you submit a patch for acceptance, it will be reviewed +on its technical merits and those alone. So, what should you be +expecting? + + - criticism + - comments + - requests for change + - requests for justification + - silence + +Remember, this is part of getting your patch into the kernel. You have +to be able to take criticism and comments about your patches, evaluate +them at a technical level and either rework your patches or provide +clear and concise reasoning as to why those changes should not be made. +If there are no responses to your posting, wait a few days and try +again, sometimes things get lost in the huge volume. + +What should you not do? + + - expect your patch to be accepted without question + - become defensive + - ignore comments + - resubmit the patch without making any of the requested changes + +In a community that is looking for the best technical solution possible, +there will always be differing opinions on how beneficial a patch is. +You have to be cooperative, and willing to adapt your idea to fit within +the kernel. Or at least be willing to prove your idea is worth it. +Remember, being wrong is acceptable as long as you are willing to work +toward a solution that is right. + +It is normal that the answers to your first patch might simply be a list +of a dozen things you should correct. This does **not** imply that your +patch will not be accepted, and it is **not** meant against you +personally. Simply correct all issues raised against your patch and +resend it. + + +Differences between the kernel community and corporate structures +----------------------------------------------------------------- + +The kernel community works differently than most traditional corporate +development environments. Here are a list of things that you can try to +do to avoid problems: + + Good things to say regarding your proposed changes: + + - "This solves multiple problems." + - "This deletes 2000 lines of code." + - "Here is a patch that explains what I am trying to describe." + - "I tested it on 5 different architectures..." + - "Here is a series of small patches that..." + - "This increases performance on typical machines..." + + Bad things you should avoid saying: + + - "We did it this way in AIX/ptx/Solaris, so therefore it must be + good..." + - "I've being doing this for 20 years, so..." + - "This is required for my company to make money" + - "This is for our Enterprise product line." + - "Here is my 1000 page design document that describes my idea" + - "I've been working on this for 6 months..." + - "Here's a 5000 line patch that..." + - "I rewrote all of the current mess, and here it is..." + - "I have a deadline, and this patch needs to be applied now." + +Another way the kernel community is different than most traditional +software engineering work environments is the faceless nature of +interaction. One benefit of using email and irc as the primary forms of +communication is the lack of discrimination based on gender or race. +The Linux kernel work environment is accepting of women and minorities +because all you are is an email address. The international aspect also +helps to level the playing field because you can't guess gender based on +a person's name. A man may be named Andrea and a woman may be named Pat. +Most women who have worked in the Linux kernel and have expressed an +opinion have had positive experiences. + +The language barrier can cause problems for some people who are not +comfortable with English. A good grasp of the language can be needed in +order to get ideas across properly on mailing lists, so it is +recommended that you check your emails to make sure they make sense in +English before sending them. + + +Break up your changes +--------------------- + +The Linux kernel community does not gladly accept large chunks of code +dropped on it all at once. The changes need to be properly introduced, +discussed, and broken up into tiny, individual portions. This is almost +the exact opposite of what companies are used to doing. Your proposal +should also be introduced very early in the development process, so that +you can receive feedback on what you are doing. It also lets the +community feel that you are working with them, and not simply using them +as a dumping ground for your feature. However, don't send 50 emails at +one time to a mailing list, your patch series should be smaller than +that almost all of the time. + +The reasons for breaking things up are the following: + +1) Small patches increase the likelihood that your patches will be + applied, since they don't take much time or effort to verify for + correctness. A 5 line patch can be applied by a maintainer with + barely a second glance. However, a 500 line patch may take hours to + review for correctness (the time it takes is exponentially + proportional to the size of the patch, or something). + + Small patches also make it very easy to debug when something goes + wrong. It's much easier to back out patches one by one than it is + to dissect a very large patch after it's been applied (and broken + something). + +2) It's important not only to send small patches, but also to rewrite + and simplify (or simply re-order) patches before submitting them. + +Here is an analogy from kernel developer Al Viro: + + *"Think of a teacher grading homework from a math student. The + teacher does not want to see the student's trials and errors + before they came up with the solution. They want to see the + cleanest, most elegant answer. A good student knows this, and + would never submit her intermediate work before the final + solution.* + + *The same is true of kernel development. The maintainers and + reviewers do not want to see the thought process behind the + solution to the problem one is solving. They want to see a + simple and elegant solution."* + +It may be challenging to keep the balance between presenting an elegant +solution and working together with the community and discussing your +unfinished work. Therefore it is good to get early in the process to +get feedback to improve your work, but also keep your changes in small +chunks that they may get already accepted, even when your whole task is +not ready for inclusion now. + +Also realize that it is not acceptable to send patches for inclusion +that are unfinished and will be "fixed up later." + + +Justify your change +------------------- + +Along with breaking up your patches, it is very important for you to let +the Linux community know why they should add this change. New features +must be justified as being needed and useful. + + +Document your change +-------------------- + +When sending in your patches, pay special attention to what you say in +the text in your email. This information will become the ChangeLog +information for the patch, and will be preserved for everyone to see for +all time. It should describe the patch completely, containing: + + - why the change is necessary + - the overall design approach in the patch + - implementation details + - testing results + +For more details on what this should all look like, please see the +ChangeLog section of the document: + + "The Perfect Patch" + https://www.ozlabs.org/~akpm/stuff/tpp.txt + + +All of these things are sometimes very hard to do. It can take years to +perfect these practices (if at all). It's a continuous process of +improvement that requires a lot of patience and determination. But +don't give up, it's possible. Many have done it before, and each had to +start exactly where you are now. + + + + +---------- + +Thanks to Paolo Ciarrocchi who allowed the "Development Process" +(https://lwn.net/Articles/94386/) section +to be based on text he had written, and to Randy Dunlap and Gerrit +Huizenga for some of the list of things you should and should not say. +Also thanks to Pat Mochel, Hanna Linder, Randy Dunlap, Kay Sievers, +Vojtech Pavlik, Jan Kara, Josh Boyer, Kees Cook, Andrew Morton, Andi +Kleen, Vadim Lobanov, Jesper Juhl, Adrian Bunk, Keri Harris, Frans Pop, +David A. Wheeler, Junio Hamano, Michael Kerrisk, and Alex Shepard for +their review, comments, and contributions. Without their help, this +document would not have been possible. + + + +Maintainer: Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@kroah.com> |