Adding upstream version 6.10.3.upstream/6.10.3

Signed-off-by: Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@progress-linux.org>

1 files changed, 111 insertions, 125 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
index 1704f1c686..edf90bbe30 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
@@ -6,29 +6,29 @@ Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux -stable releases
 Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the
 "-stable" tree:
 
- - It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree (upstream).
- - It must be obviously correct and tested.
- - It cannot be bigger than 100 lines, with context.
- - It must follow the
-   :ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <submittingpatches>`
-   rules.
- - It must either fix a real bug that bothers people or just add a device ID.
-   To elaborate on the former:
-
-   - It fixes a problem like an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real security
-     issue, a hardware quirk, a build error (but not for things marked
-     CONFIG_BROKEN), or some "oh, that's not good" issue.
-   - Serious issues as reported by a user of a distribution kernel may also
-     be considered if they fix a notable performance or interactivity issue.
-     As these fixes are not as obvious and have a higher risk of a subtle
-     regression they should only be submitted by a distribution kernel
-     maintainer and include an addendum linking to a bugzilla entry if it
-     exists and additional information on the user-visible impact.
-   - No "This could be a problem..." type of things like a "theoretical race
-     condition", unless an explanation of how the bug can be exploited is also
-     provided.
-   - No "trivial" fixes without benefit for users (spelling changes, whitespace
-     cleanups, etc).
+- It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linux mainline (upstream).
+- It must be obviously correct and tested.
+- It cannot be bigger than 100 lines, with context.
+- It must follow the
+  :ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <submittingpatches>`
+  rules.
+- It must either fix a real bug that bothers people or just add a device ID.
+  To elaborate on the former:
+
+  - It fixes a problem like an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real security
+    issue, a hardware quirk, a build error (but not for things marked
+    CONFIG_BROKEN), or some "oh, that's not good" issue.
+  - Serious issues as reported by a user of a distribution kernel may also
+    be considered if they fix a notable performance or interactivity issue.
+    As these fixes are not as obvious and have a higher risk of a subtle
+    regression they should only be submitted by a distribution kernel
+    maintainer and include an addendum linking to a bugzilla entry if it
+    exists and additional information on the user-visible impact.
+  - No "This could be a problem..." type of things like a "theoretical race
+    condition", unless an explanation of how the bug can be exploited is also
+    provided.
+  - No "trivial" fixes without benefit for users (spelling changes, whitespace
+    cleanups, etc).
 
 
 Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree
@@ -42,11 +42,11 @@ Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree
 
 There are three options to submit a change to -stable trees:
 
- 1. Add a 'stable tag' to the description of a patch you then submit for
-    mainline inclusion.
- 2. Ask the stable team to pick up a patch already mainlined.
- 3. Submit a patch to the stable team that is equivalent to a change already
-    mainlined.
+1. Add a 'stable tag' to the description of a patch you then submit for
+   mainline inclusion.
+2. Ask the stable team to pick up a patch already mainlined.
+3. Submit a patch to the stable team that is equivalent to a change already
+   mainlined.
 
 The sections below describe each of the options in more detail.
 
@@ -68,82 +68,72 @@ Option 1
 ********
 
 To have a patch you submit for mainline inclusion later automatically picked up
-for stable trees, add the tag
+for stable trees, add this tag in the sign-off area::
 
-.. code-block:: none
+  Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
 
-     Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
+Use ``Cc: stable@kernel.org`` instead when fixing unpublished vulnerabilities:
+it reduces the chance of accidentally exposing the fix to the public by way of
+'git send-email', as mails sent to that address are not delivered anywhere.
 
-in the sign-off area. Once the patch is mainlined it will be applied to the
-stable tree without anything else needing to be done by the author or
-subsystem maintainer.
+Once the patch is mainlined it will be applied to the stable tree without
+anything else needing to be done by the author or subsystem maintainer.
 
-To sent additional instructions to the stable team, use a shell-style inline
-comment:
+To send additional instructions to the stable team, use a shell-style inline
+comment to pass arbitrary or predefined notes:
 
- * To specify any additional patch prerequisites for cherry picking use the
-   following format in the sign-off area:
+* Specify any additional patch prerequisites for cherry picking::
 
-   .. code-block:: none
+    Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: a1f84a3: sched: Check for idle
+    Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: 1b9508f: sched: Rate-limit newidle
+    Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: fd21073: sched: Fix affinity logic
+    Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x
+    Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
 
-     Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: a1f84a3: sched: Check for idle
-     Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: 1b9508f: sched: Rate-limit newidle
-     Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x: fd21073: sched: Fix affinity logic
-     Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x
-     Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
+  The tag sequence has the meaning of::
 
-   The tag sequence has the meaning of:
+    git cherry-pick a1f84a3
+    git cherry-pick 1b9508f
+    git cherry-pick fd21073
+    git cherry-pick <this commit>
 
-   .. code-block:: none
+  Note that for a patch series, you do not have to list as prerequisites the
+  patches present in the series itself. For example, if you have the following
+  patch series::
 
-     git cherry-pick a1f84a3
-     git cherry-pick 1b9508f
-     git cherry-pick fd21073
-     git cherry-pick <this commit>
+    patch1
+    patch2
 
-   Note that for a patch series, you do not have to list as prerequisites the
-   patches present in the series itself. For example, if you have the following
-   patch series:
+  where patch2 depends on patch1, you do not have to list patch1 as
+  prerequisite of patch2 if you have already marked patch1 for stable
+  inclusion.
 
-   .. code-block:: none
+* Point out kernel version prerequisites::
 
-     patch1
-     patch2
+    Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x
 
-   where patch2 depends on patch1, you do not have to list patch1 as
-   prerequisite of patch2 if you have already marked patch1 for stable
-   inclusion.
+  The tag has the meaning of::
 
- * For patches that may have kernel version prerequisites specify them using
-   the following format in the sign-off area:
+    git cherry-pick <this commit>
 
-   .. code-block:: none
+  For each "-stable" tree starting with the specified version.
 
-     Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3.x
+  Note, such tagging is unnecessary if the stable team can derive the
+  appropriate versions from Fixes: tags.
 
-   The tag has the meaning of:
+* Delay pick up of patches::
 
-   .. code-block:: none
+    Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # after -rc3
 
-     git cherry-pick <this commit>
+* Point out known problems::
 
-   For each "-stable" tree starting with the specified version.
+    Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # see patch description, needs adjustments for <= 6.3
 
-   Note, such tagging is unnecessary if the stable team can derive the
-   appropriate versions from Fixes: tags.
+There furthermore is a variant of the stable tag you can use to make the stable
+team's backporting tools (e.g AUTOSEL or scripts that look for commits
+containing a 'Fixes:' tag) ignore a change::
 
- * To delay pick up of patches, use the following format:
-
-   .. code-block:: none
-
-     Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # after 4 weeks in mainline
-
- * For any other requests, just add a note to the stable tag. This for example
-   can be used to point out known problems:
-
-   .. code-block:: none
-
-     Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # see patch description, needs adjustments for <= 6.3
+     Cc: <stable+noautosel@kernel.org> # reason goes here, and must be present
 
 .. _option_2:
 
@@ -163,17 +153,13 @@ Option 3
 Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to
 stable@vger.kernel.org and mention the kernel versions you wish it to be applied
 to. When doing so, you must note the upstream commit ID in the changelog of your
-submission with a separate line above the commit text, like this:
-
-.. code-block:: none
-
-    commit <sha1> upstream.
+submission with a separate line above the commit text, like this::
 
-or alternatively:
+  commit <sha1> upstream.
 
-.. code-block:: none
+Or alternatively::
 
-    [ Upstream commit <sha1> ]
+  [ Upstream commit <sha1> ]
 
 If the submitted patch deviates from the original upstream patch (for example
 because it had to be adjusted for the older API), this must be very clearly
@@ -194,55 +180,55 @@ developers and by the relevant subsystem maintainer.
 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.
- - 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.
- - The ACKed patches will be posted again as part of release candidate (-rc)
-   to be tested by developers and testers.
- - Usually only one -rc release is made, however if there are any outstanding
-   issues, some patches may be modified or dropped or additional patches may
-   be queued. Additional -rc releases are then released and tested until no
-   issues are found.
- - Responding to the -rc releases can be done on the mailing list by sending
-   a "Tested-by:" email with any testing information desired. The "Tested-by:"
-   tags will be collected and added to the release commit.
- - At the end of the review cycle, the new -stable release will be released
-   containing all the queued and tested patches.
- - 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.
+- 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
+  members object to the patch, bringing up issues that the maintainers and
+  members did not realize, the patch will be dropped from the queue.
+- The ACKed patches will be posted again as part of release candidate (-rc)
+  to be tested by developers and testers.
+- Usually only one -rc release is made, however if there are any outstanding
+  issues, some patches may be modified or dropped or additional patches may
+  be queued. Additional -rc releases are then released and tested until no
+  issues are found.
+- Responding to the -rc releases can be done on the mailing list by sending
+  a "Tested-by:" email with any testing information desired. The "Tested-by:"
+  tags will be collected and added to the release commit.
+- At the end of the review cycle, the new -stable release will be released
+  containing all the queued and tested patches.
+- 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.
 
 
 Trees
 -----
 
- - The queues of patches, for both completed versions and in progress
-   versions can be found at:
+- The queues of patches, for both completed versions and in progress
+  versions can be found at:
 
-	https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git
+    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git
 
- - The finalized and tagged releases of all stable kernels can be found
-   in separate branches per version at:
+- The finalized and tagged releases of all stable kernels can be found
+  in separate branches per version at:
 
-	https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git
+    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git
 
- - The release candidate of all stable kernel versions can be found at:
+- The release candidate of all stable kernel versions can be found at:
 
-        https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git/
+    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git/
 
-   .. warning::
-      The -stable-rc tree is a snapshot in time of the stable-queue tree and
-      will change frequently, hence will be rebased often. It should only be
-      used for testing purposes (e.g. to be consumed by CI systems).
+  .. warning::
+     The -stable-rc tree is a snapshot in time of the stable-queue tree and
+     will change frequently, hence will be rebased often. It should only be
+     used for testing purposes (e.g. to be consumed by CI systems).
 
 
 Review committee
 ----------------
 
- - This is made up of a number of kernel developers who have volunteered for
-   this task, and a few that haven't.
+- This is made up of a number of kernel developers who have volunteered for
+  this task, and a few that haven't.