Let's re-insert the Code of Conflict. Greg Kroah-Hartman is an usurper. #594

jason-oliveira · 2018-09-19T14:11:56Z

Undoing the Freedesktop.org coup. Linus was blackmailed.

…r. Undoing the Freedesktop.org coup.

KernelPRBot · 2018-09-19T14:14:37Z

Thanks for your contribution to the Linux kernel!

Linux kernel development happens on mailing lists, rather than on GitHub - this GitHub repository is a read-only mirror that isn't used for accepting contributions. So that your change can become part of Linux, please email it to us as a patch.

Sending patches isn't quite as simple as sending a pull request, but fortunately it is a well documented process.

Here's what to do:

Format your contribution according to kernel requirements
Decide who to send your contribution to
Set up your system to send your contribution as an email
Send your contribution and wait for feedback

How do I format my contribution?

The Linux kernel community is notoriously picky about how contributions are formatted and sent. Fortunately, they have documented their expectations.

Firstly, all contributions need to be formatted as patches. A patch is a plain text document showing the change you want to make to the code, and documenting why it is a good idea.

You can create patches with git format-patch.

Secondly, patches need 'commit messages', which is the human-friendly documentation explaining what the change is and why it's necessary.

Thirdly, changes have some technical requirements. There is a Linux kernel coding style, and there are licensing requirements you need to comply with.

Both of these are documented in the Submitting Patches documentation that is part of the kernel.

Note that you will almost certainly have to modify your existing git commits to satisfy these requirements. Don't worry: there are many guides on the internet for doing this.

Who do I send my contribution to?

The Linux kernel is composed of a number of subsystems. These subsystems are maintained by different people, and have different mailing lists where they discuss proposed changes.

If you don't already know what subsystem your change belongs to, the get_maintainer.pl script in the kernel source can help you.

get_maintainer.pl will take the patch or patches you created in the previous step, and tell you who is responsible for them, and what mailing lists are used. You can also take a look at the MAINTAINERS file by hand.

Make sure that your list of recipients includes a mailing list. If you can't find a more specific mailing list, then LKML - the Linux Kernel Mailing List - is the place to send your patches.

It's not usually necessary to subscribe to the mailing list before you send the patches, but if you're interested in kernel development, subscribing to a subsystem mailing list is a good idea. (At this point, you probably don't need to subscribe to LKML - it is a very high traffic list with about a thousand messages per day, which is often not useful for beginners.)

How do I send my contribution?

Use git send-email, which will ensure that your patches are formatted in the standard manner. In order to use git send-email, you'll need to configure git to use your SMTP email server.

For more information about using git send-email, look at the Git documentation or type git help send-email. There are a number of useful guides and tutorials about git send-email that can be found on the internet.

How do I get help if I'm stuck?

Firstly, don't get discouraged! There are an enormous number of resources on the internet, and many kernel developers who would like to see you succeed.

Many issues - especially about how to use certain tools - can be resolved by using your favourite internet search engine.

If you can't find an answer, there are a few places you can turn:

Kernel Newbies - this website contains a lot of useful resources for new kernel developers.
The kernel documentation - see also the Documentation directory in the kernel tree.

If you get really, really stuck, you could try the owners of this bot, @daxtens and @ajdlinux. Please be aware that we do have full-time jobs, so we are almost certainly the slowest way to get answers!

I sent my patch - now what?

You wait.

You can check that your email has been received by checking the mailing list archives for the mailing list you sent your patch to. Messages may not be received instantly, so be patient. Kernel developers are generally very busy people, so it may take a few weeks before your patch is looked at.

Then, you keep waiting. Three things may happen:

You might get a response to your email. Often these will be comments, which may require you to make changes to your patch, or explain why your way is the best way. You should respond to these comments, and you may need to submit another revision of your patch to address the issues raised.
Your patch might be merged into the subsystem tree. Code that becomes part of Linux isn't merged into the main repository straight away - it first goes into the subsystem tree, which is managed by the subsystem maintainer. It is then batched up with a number of other changes sent to Linus for inclusion. (This process is described in some detail in the kernel development process guide).
Your patch might be ignored completely. This happens sometimes - don't take it personally. Here's what to do:
- Wait a bit more - patches often take several weeks to get a response; more if they were sent at a busy time.
- Kernel developers often silently ignore patches that break the rules. Check for obvious violations of the Submitting Patches guidelines, the style guidelines, and any other documentation you can find about your subsystem. Check that you're sending your patch to the right place.
- Try again later. When you resend it, don't add angry commentary, as that will get your patch ignored. It might also get you silently blacklisted.

Further information

Working with the kernel development community - the official documentation for new kernel contributors

Happy hacking!

This message was posted by a bot - if you have any questions or suggestions, please talk to my owners, @ajdlinux and @daxtens, or raise an issue at https://github.com/ajdlinux/KernelPRBot.

bmeh · 2018-09-22T12:38:38Z

https://lulz.com/linux-devs-threaten-killswitch-coc-controversy-1252/

konstantin90s · 2018-09-23T00:20:24Z

It has come to my attention that linux kernel's source code contains problematic ableist/saneist terms and/or pejoratives, namely

sanity check 144
silly 26
insane 13
crazy 13
stupid 6
lame 2
lunatic 1

Some of those slipped into the documentation. In an attempt to makelinux kernel's community more inclusive and welcoming, we should clean up these usages and replace them with something neutral (where applicable). Unfortunately, to this day many developers deem such efforts as "trolling", so please note that the precedent has already been set by many major projects. Here're just a few:

unpkg/unpkg.com#81
reduxjs/redux#2335
rtfd/readthedocs.org#3752
krzysztofzablocki/Sourcery#2
xi-editor/xi-editor#126

Other resources:

https://english.stackexchange.com/q/282282
http://isthisableism.tumblr.com/sluralternatives

The goal of this issue is not to stir up arguments, but to figure out the alternatives and ways to replace those problematic terms.

you are a bad joke

felipemullen · 2018-09-27T05:23:46Z

Keep politics out of software.
#593 ✔️

technic · 2018-09-27T15:45:57Z

Merge!

fixed apt get error and added schedule for the github CI workflow

Merge stable tags up to v5.15.50

Deletion of the last rule referencing a given idletimer may happen at the same time as a read of its file in sysfs: | ====================================================== | WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected | 6.12.0-rc7-01692-g5e9a28f41134-dirty torvalds#594 Not tainted | ------------------------------------------------------ | iptables/3303 is trying to acquire lock: | ffff8881057e04b8 (kn->active#48){++++}-{0:0}, at: __kernfs_remove+0x20 | | but task is already holding lock: | ffffffffa0249068 (list_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: idletimer_tg_destroy_v] | | which lock already depends on the new lock. A simple reproducer is: | #!/bin/bash | | while true; do | iptables -A INPUT -i foo -j IDLETIMER --timeout 10 --label "testme" | iptables -D INPUT -i foo -j IDLETIMER --timeout 10 --label "testme" | done & | while true; do | cat /sys/class/xt_idletimer/timers/testme >/dev/null | done Avoid this by freeing list_mutex right after deleting the element from the list, then continuing with the teardown. Fixes: 0902b46 ("netfilter: xtables: idletimer target implementation") Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc>

Deletion of the last rule referencing a given idletimer may happen at the same time as a read of its file in sysfs: | ====================================================== | WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected | 6.12.0-rc7-01692-g5e9a28f41134-dirty torvalds#594 Not tainted | ------------------------------------------------------ | iptables/3303 is trying to acquire lock: | ffff8881057e04b8 (kn->active#48){++++}-{0:0}, at: __kernfs_remove+0x20 | | but task is already holding lock: | ffffffffa0249068 (list_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: idletimer_tg_destroy_v] | | which lock already depends on the new lock. A simple reproducer is: | #!/bin/bash | | while true; do | iptables -A INPUT -i foo -j IDLETIMER --timeout 10 --label "testme" | iptables -D INPUT -i foo -j IDLETIMER --timeout 10 --label "testme" | done & | while true; do | cat /sys/class/xt_idletimer/timers/testme >/dev/null | done Avoid this by freeing list_mutex right after deleting the element from the list, then continuing with the teardown. Fixes: 0902b46 ("netfilter: xtables: idletimer target implementation") Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org> Signed-off-by: NipaLocal <nipa@local>

Deletion of the last rule referencing a given idletimer may happen at the same time as a read of its file in sysfs: | ====================================================== | WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected | 6.12.0-rc7-01692-g5e9a28f41134-dirty torvalds#594 Not tainted | ------------------------------------------------------ | iptables/3303 is trying to acquire lock: | ffff8881057e04b8 (kn->active#48){++++}-{0:0}, at: __kernfs_remove+0x20 | | but task is already holding lock: | ffffffffa0249068 (list_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: idletimer_tg_destroy_v] | | which lock already depends on the new lock. A simple reproducer is: | #!/bin/bash | | while true; do | iptables -A INPUT -i foo -j IDLETIMER --timeout 10 --label "testme" | iptables -D INPUT -i foo -j IDLETIMER --timeout 10 --label "testme" | done & | while true; do | cat /sys/class/xt_idletimer/timers/testme >/dev/null | done Avoid this by freeing list_mutex right after deleting the element from the list, then continuing with the teardown. Fixes: 0902b46 ("netfilter: xtables: idletimer target implementation") Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>

With CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING, when creating a set of type bitmap:ip, adding it to a set of type list:set and populating it from iptables SET target triggers a kernel warning: | WARNING: possible recursive locking detected | 6.12.0-rc7-01692-g5e9a28f41134-dirty torvalds#594 Not tainted | -------------------------------------------- | ping/4018 is trying to acquire lock: | ffff8881094a6848 (&set->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: ip_set_add+0x28c/0x360 [ip_set] | | but task is already holding lock: | ffff88811034c048 (&set->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: ip_set_add+0x28c/0x360 [ip_set] This is a false alarm: ipset does not allow nested list:set type, so the loop in list_set_kadd() can never encounter the outer set itself. No other set type supports embedded sets, so this is the only case to consider. To avoid the false report, create a distinct lock class for list:set type ipset locks. Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc>

[ Upstream commit f36b019 ] Deletion of the last rule referencing a given idletimer may happen at the same time as a read of its file in sysfs: | ====================================================== | WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected | 6.12.0-rc7-01692-g5e9a28f41134-dirty torvalds#594 Not tainted | ------------------------------------------------------ | iptables/3303 is trying to acquire lock: | ffff8881057e04b8 (kn->active#48){++++}-{0:0}, at: __kernfs_remove+0x20 | | but task is already holding lock: | ffffffffa0249068 (list_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: idletimer_tg_destroy_v] | | which lock already depends on the new lock. A simple reproducer is: | #!/bin/bash | | while true; do | iptables -A INPUT -i foo -j IDLETIMER --timeout 10 --label "testme" | iptables -D INPUT -i foo -j IDLETIMER --timeout 10 --label "testme" | done & | while true; do | cat /sys/class/xt_idletimer/timers/testme >/dev/null | done Avoid this by freeing list_mutex right after deleting the element from the list, then continuing with the teardown. Fixes: 0902b46 ("netfilter: xtables: idletimer target implementation") Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

With CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING, when creating a set of type bitmap:ip, adding it to a set of type list:set and populating it from iptables SET target triggers a kernel warning: | WARNING: possible recursive locking detected | 6.12.0-rc7-01692-g5e9a28f41134-dirty torvalds#594 Not tainted | -------------------------------------------- | ping/4018 is trying to acquire lock: | ffff8881094a6848 (&set->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: ip_set_add+0x28c/0x360 [ip_set] | | but task is already holding lock: | ffff88811034c048 (&set->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: ip_set_add+0x28c/0x360 [ip_set] This is a false alarm: ipset does not allow nested list:set type, so the loop in list_set_kadd() can never encounter the outer set itself. No other set type supports embedded sets, so this is the only case to consider. To avoid the false report, create a distinct lock class for list:set type ipset locks. Fixes: f830837 ("netfilter: ipset: list:set set type support") Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org> Signed-off-by: NipaLocal <nipa@local>

With CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING, when creating a set of type bitmap:ip, adding it to a set of type list:set and populating it from iptables SET target triggers a kernel warning: | WARNING: possible recursive locking detected | 6.12.0-rc7-01692-g5e9a28f41134-dirty torvalds#594 Not tainted | -------------------------------------------- | ping/4018 is trying to acquire lock: | ffff8881094a6848 (&set->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: ip_set_add+0x28c/0x360 [ip_set] | | but task is already holding lock: | ffff88811034c048 (&set->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: ip_set_add+0x28c/0x360 [ip_set] This is a false alarm: ipset does not allow nested list:set type, so the loop in list_set_kadd() can never encounter the outer set itself. No other set type supports embedded sets, so this is the only case to consider. To avoid the false report, create a distinct lock class for list:set type ipset locks. Fixes: f830837 ("netfilter: ipset: list:set set type support") Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>

[ Upstream commit f36b019 ] Deletion of the last rule referencing a given idletimer may happen at the same time as a read of its file in sysfs: | ====================================================== | WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected | 6.12.0-rc7-01692-g5e9a28f41134-dirty torvalds#594 Not tainted | ------------------------------------------------------ | iptables/3303 is trying to acquire lock: | ffff8881057e04b8 (kn->active#48){++++}-{0:0}, at: __kernfs_remove+0x20 | | but task is already holding lock: | ffffffffa0249068 (list_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: idletimer_tg_destroy_v] | | which lock already depends on the new lock. A simple reproducer is: | #!/bin/bash | | while true; do | iptables -A INPUT -i foo -j IDLETIMER --timeout 10 --label "testme" | iptables -D INPUT -i foo -j IDLETIMER --timeout 10 --label "testme" | done & | while true; do | cat /sys/class/xt_idletimer/timers/testme >/dev/null | done Avoid this by freeing list_mutex right after deleting the element from the list, then continuing with the teardown. Fixes: 0902b46 ("netfilter: xtables: idletimer target implementation") Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

[ Upstream commit 70b6f46 ] With CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING, when creating a set of type bitmap:ip, adding it to a set of type list:set and populating it from iptables SET target triggers a kernel warning: | WARNING: possible recursive locking detected | 6.12.0-rc7-01692-g5e9a28f41134-dirty torvalds#594 Not tainted | -------------------------------------------- | ping/4018 is trying to acquire lock: | ffff8881094a6848 (&set->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: ip_set_add+0x28c/0x360 [ip_set] | | but task is already holding lock: | ffff88811034c048 (&set->lock){+.-.}-{2:2}, at: ip_set_add+0x28c/0x360 [ip_set] This is a false alarm: ipset does not allow nested list:set type, so the loop in list_set_kadd() can never encounter the outer set itself. No other set type supports embedded sets, so this is the only case to consider. To avoid the false report, create a distinct lock class for list:set type ipset locks. Fixes: f830837 ("netfilter: ipset: list:set set type support") Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

Let's re-insert the Code of Conflict. Greg Kroah-Hartman is an usurpe…

eaf686f

…r. Undoing the Freedesktop.org coup.

SteveHeist mentioned this pull request Sep 26, 2018

Replaced the Code of Conduct with the Code of Conflict #599

Open

ojeda pushed a commit to ojeda/linux that referenced this pull request Dec 14, 2021

Merge pull request torvalds#594 from mauro-balades/patch-1

a0f5988

fixed apt get error and added schedule for the github CI workflow

Mimoja pushed a commit to Mimoja/linux that referenced this pull request Aug 26, 2023

Merge pull request torvalds#594 from angolini/angolini/v5.15.50

f4007ca

Merge stable tags up to v5.15.50

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Let's re-insert the Code of Conflict. Greg Kroah-Hartman is an usurper. #594

Let's re-insert the Code of Conflict. Greg Kroah-Hartman is an usurper. #594

jason-oliveira commented Sep 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

KernelPRBot commented Sep 19, 2018

bmeh commented Sep 22, 2018

konstantin90s commented Sep 23, 2018

felipemullen commented Sep 27, 2018 •

edited

Loading

technic commented Sep 27, 2018

Let's re-insert the Code of Conflict. Greg Kroah-Hartman is an usurper. #594

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Let's re-insert the Code of Conflict. Greg Kroah-Hartman is an usurper. #594

Conversation

jason-oliveira commented Sep 19, 2018 • edited Loading

KernelPRBot commented Sep 19, 2018

How do I format my contribution?

Who do I send my contribution to?

How do I send my contribution?

How do I get help if I'm stuck?

I sent my patch - now what?

Further information

bmeh commented Sep 22, 2018

konstantin90s commented Sep 23, 2018

felipemullen commented Sep 27, 2018 • edited Loading

technic commented Sep 27, 2018

jason-oliveira commented Sep 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

felipemullen commented Sep 27, 2018 •

edited

Loading