[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Classification scheme for 2.6 kernel patches



Hi,

A few months ago, I asked on this list for more informative
description of patches enabling non-kernel hackers to choose
individual patchsets for their local kernels. Unfortunately, that
question was denied pretty fast. Looks like you guys don't have time
to write more extensive docs.

cleanup: Cosmetic change
bugfix: Fixes a bug that might result in errant behavior
crashfix: Fixes a bug that might result in a kernel crash
oopsfix: Fixes a bug that might result in a kernel oops
build: Fixes a build time issue
feature: Adds a new feature
maybe-security: Fixes an issue that might pose a security problem
security: Fixes a sure security problem
license: Patch accompanying driver removal due to license issues
documentation: Documentation patch only
patchfix: fixes a bug introduced by some other patch

Architecture-specific tags do not seem to be necessary as architecture
specific patches have the architecture in their file name.

To locate possible problems with the classification, I have tried to
roughly classify the patches from current 2.6.10 svn:

x86-i486_emu.dpatch   	  	       	  	feature
tty-locking-fixes9.dpatch  			bugfix
sparc64-hme-lockup.dpatch  			bugfix
sparc32-initrd-memcpy.dpatch			bugfix
smbfs-overflow-fixes.dpatch	 		maybe-security
smbfs-overflow-fixes-2.dpatch	 		maybe-security
sec_brk-locked.dpatch		 	       	security
remove-references-to-removed-drivers.dpatch	license
powerpc-serial.dpatch				bugfix
powerpc-pegasos-via82cxxx.dpatch		bugfix
powerpc-pegasos-2.dpatch			feature
powerpc-g4-l2-flush-errata.dpatch		bugfix
modular-vesafb.dpatch				feature
modular-vesafb-2.dpatch				feature
modular-ide.dpatch				bugfix
modular-ide-pnp.dpatch				feature
modular-ide-2.dpatch				feature
marvell-pegasos.dpatch				feature
ia64-irq-affinity-upfix.dpatch			build
ia64-generic-no-smp.dpatch			build
ia64-generic-no-smp-1-to-2.dpatch		build
ia64-bte_error-missing-include.dpatch		build
fs-asfs.dpatch					feature
fix-mxser-compile.dpatch			build
drm-locking-fixes.dpatch			crashfix
drivers-scsi_changer.dpatch			feature
drivers-net-tg3-readd.dpatch			license
drivers-net-8139too-locking.dpatch		crashfix
drivers-input-psaux-hacks.dpatch		feature
drivers-ide-dma-blacklist-toshiba.dpatch	bugfix
drivers-ide-__devinit.dpatch			cleanup
doc-post_halloween.dpatch			documentation
alsa-module-load-fix.dpatch			crashfix
032-do_brk_security_fixes.dpatch		security
031-sg_scsi_ioctl_int_overflows.dpatch		security
030-moxa_user_copy_checking.dpatch		security
029-random_poolsize_overflow.dpatch		security
028-do_brk_security_fixes.dpatch		security
027-track_dummy_capability-2.dpatch		cleanup
026-nfs_o_direct_error.dpatch			maybe-security
025-track_dummy_capability.dpatch		maybe-security
024-nfs_incorrect_df_output.dpatch		bugfix
023-nfs_dentry_refcount.dpatch			bugfix
022-sunrpc_xdr_flush_pages.dpatch		bugfix
021-sunrpc_check_before_kill.dpatch		bugfix
020-clear_cyrix_mii_ecx_reg.dpatch		bugfix
019-conntrack_tcp_RST_handling.dpatch		bugfix
018-ipt_recent_proc_remove.dpatch		bugfix
017-conntrack_sctp_sysctl.dpatch		bugfix
016-cs461x_gameport.dpatch			feature
015-vmscan_total_scanned.dpatch			bugfix
014-acpi_video_dev_slab_corruption.dpatch	maybe-security
013-conntrack_standalone_sysctl.dpatch		bugfix
012-conntrack_standalone_proc_removal.dpatch	bugfix
011-parport_pc_module_parm_mixing.dpatch	cleanup
010-sparc64_macro_pmd_offset.dpatch		cleanup
009-ipt_ecn_corrupt_chksum.dpatch		bugfix
008-sock_without_ipv6.dpatch			build
007-pci_ide_no_reserve.dpatch			bugfix
006-zatm_cast_fix_fix.dpatch			build
005-sparc64_no_i_sock-2.dpatch			patchfix
004-sparc64_no_i_sock.dpatch			build
003-libata_alpha_build_fix.dpatch		build
002-pio_err_handling.dpatch			bugfix
001-acpi_ibm_exit.dpatch			cleanup

One possible source of problems is that some patches, for example the
patchfix patches, depend on some other patches. In those case, that
dependency needs to be documented more clearly.

Additionally, maybe the bugfix category needs to be split into more
categories, we have too many patches in that category.

The categorization may be wrong since I don't have too much clue with
kernel hacking and did this categorization mainly from the comments of
the patch. In my opinion, it would be desireable that a patch be
categorized by the kernel team on inclusion into Debian svn.

I would like to solicit your comments about this concept.

Greetings
Marc

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber         | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany  |  lose things."    Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Nordisch by Nature |  How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835



Reply to: