You can not select more than 25 topics
Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
609 lines
27 KiB
609 lines
27 KiB
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If anything in this document becomes out of date, please send in patches |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, for details on |
|
the license. 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: |
|
http://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: |
|
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. |
|
|
|
Documentation/Changes |
|
This file gives a list of the minimum levels of various software |
|
packages that are necessary to build and run the kernel |
|
successfully. |
|
|
|
Documentation/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. |
|
|
|
Documentation/SubmittingPatches |
|
Documentation/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" |
|
http://www.ozlabs.org/~akpm/stuff/tpp.txt |
|
"Linux kernel patch submission format" |
|
http://linux.yyz.us/patch-format.html |
|
|
|
Documentation/stable_api_nonsense.txt |
|
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. |
|
|
|
Documentation/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. |
|
|
|
Documentation/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. |
|
|
|
Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt |
|
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. |
|
|
|
Documentation/kernel-docs.txt |
|
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. |
|
|
|
Documentation/applying-patches.txt |
|
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. This includes a |
|
full description of the in-kernel API, and rules on how to handle |
|
locking properly. The documents will be created in the |
|
Documentation/DocBook/ directory and can be generated as PDF, |
|
Postscript, HTML, and man pages by running: |
|
make pdfdocs |
|
make psdocs |
|
make htmldocs |
|
make mandocs |
|
respectively from the main kernel source directory. |
|
|
|
|
|
Becoming A Kernel Developer |
|
--------------------------- |
|
|
|
If you do not know anything about Linux kernel development, you should |
|
look at the Linux KernelNewbies project: |
|
http://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: |
|
http://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. |
|
|
|
If you already have a chunk of code that you want to put into the kernel |
|
tree, but need some help getting it in the proper form, the |
|
kernel-mentors project was created to help you out with this. It is a |
|
mailing list, and can be found at: |
|
http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-mentors |
|
|
|
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: |
|
http://lxr.linux.no/+trees |
|
|
|
|
|
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: |
|
- main 4.x kernel tree |
|
- 4.x.y -stable kernel tree |
|
- 4.x -git kernel patches |
|
- subsystem specific kernel trees and patches |
|
- the 4.x -next kernel tree for integration tests |
|
|
|
4.x kernel tree |
|
----------------- |
|
4.x kernels are maintained by Linus Torvalds, and can be found on |
|
kernel.org in the pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/ directory. Its development |
|
process is as follows: |
|
- As soon as a new kernel is released a two weeks 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 |
|
-next kernel 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 http://git-scm.com/) but plain patches are also just |
|
fine. |
|
- After two weeks a -rc1 kernel is released it is now possible to push |
|
only patches that do not include new features that could affect the |
|
stability of the whole kernel. 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. |
|
- Known regressions in each release are periodically posted to the |
|
linux-kernel mailing list. The goal is to reduce the length of |
|
that list to zero before declaring the kernel to be "ready," but, in |
|
the real world, a small number of regressions often remain at |
|
release time. |
|
|
|
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." |
|
|
|
4.x.y -stable kernel tree |
|
--------------------------- |
|
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 4.x kernel. |
|
|
|
This is the recommended branch for users who want the most recent stable |
|
kernel and are not interested in helping test development/experimental |
|
versions. |
|
|
|
If no 4.x.y kernel is available, then the highest numbered 4.x |
|
kernel is the current stable kernel. |
|
|
|
4.x.y 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 Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt in the kernel tree |
|
documents what kinds of changes are acceptable for the -stable tree, and |
|
how the release process works. |
|
|
|
4.x -git patches |
|
------------------ |
|
These are daily snapshots of Linus' kernel tree which are managed in a |
|
git repository (hence the name.) These patches are usually released |
|
daily and represent the current state of Linus' tree. They are more |
|
experimental than -rc kernels since they are generated automatically |
|
without even a cursory glance to see if they are sane. |
|
|
|
Subsystem Specific kernel trees and patches |
|
------------------------------------------- |
|
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 http://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 |
|
http://patchwork.kernel.org/. |
|
|
|
4.x -next kernel tree for integration tests |
|
--------------------------------------------- |
|
Before updates from subsystem trees are merged into the mainline 4.x |
|
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: |
|
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git |
|
|
|
This way, the -next kernel 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 -next kernel. |
|
|
|
|
|
Bug Reporting |
|
------------- |
|
|
|
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: |
|
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/page.cgi?id=faq.html |
|
|
|
The file REPORTING-BUGS 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, you'll 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 http://bugzilla.kernel.org. |
|
If you want to be advised of the future bug reports, you can subscribe to the |
|
bugme-new mailing list (only new bug reports are mailed here) or to the |
|
bugme-janitor mailing list (every change in the bugzilla is mailed here) |
|
|
|
http://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bugme-new |
|
http://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bugme-janitors |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 Documentation/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" |
|
http://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" |
|
(http://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>
|
|
|