docs: netdev: move the netdev-FAQ to the process pages

The documentation for the tip tree is really in quite a similar
spirit to the netdev-FAQ. Move the netdev-FAQ to the process docs
as well.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>

2 files changed, 2 insertions, 286 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/networking/index.rst b/Documentation/networking/index.rst
index ce017136ab05..72cf33579b78 100644
--- a/Documentation/networking/index.rst
+++ b/Documentation/networking/index.rst
@@ -1,12 +1,13 @@
 Linux Networking Documentation
 ==============================
 
+Refer to :ref:`netdev-FAQ` for a guide on netdev development process specifics.
+
 Contents:
 
 .. toctree::
    :maxdepth: 2
 
-   netdev-FAQ
    af_xdp
    bareudp
    batman-adv
diff --git a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst b/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst
deleted file mode 100644
index c456b5225d66..000000000000
--- a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,285 +0,0 @@
-.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
-
-.. _netdev-FAQ:
-
-==========
-netdev FAQ
-==========
-
-What is netdev?
----------------
-It is a mailing list for all network-related Linux stuff.  This
-includes anything found under net/ (i.e. core code like IPv6) and
-drivers/net (i.e. hardware specific drivers) in the Linux source tree.
-
-Note that some subsystems (e.g. wireless drivers) which have a high
-volume of traffic have their own specific mailing lists.
-
-The netdev list is managed (like many other Linux mailing lists) through
-VGER (http://vger.kernel.org/) with archives available at
-https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/
-
-Aside from subsystems like those mentioned above, all network-related
-Linux development (i.e. RFC, review, comments, etc.) takes place on
-netdev.
-
-How do the changes posted to netdev make their way into Linux?
---------------------------------------------------------------
-There are always two trees (git repositories) in play.  Both are
-driven by David Miller, the main network maintainer.  There is the
-``net`` tree, and the ``net-next`` tree.  As you can probably guess from
-the names, the ``net`` tree is for fixes to existing code already in the
-mainline tree from Linus, and ``net-next`` is where the new code goes
-for the future release.  You can find the trees here:
-
-- https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git
-- https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next.git
-
-How do I indicate which tree (net vs. net-next) my patch should be in?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-To help maintainers and CI bots you should explicitly mark which tree
-your patch is targeting. Assuming that you use git, use the prefix
-flag::
-
-  git format-patch --subject-prefix='PATCH net-next' start..finish
-
-Use ``net`` instead of ``net-next`` (always lower case) in the above for
-bug-fix ``net`` content.
-
-How often do changes from these trees make it to the mainline Linus tree?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-To understand this, you need to know a bit of background information on
-the cadence of Linux development.  Each new release starts off with a
-two week "merge window" where the main maintainers feed their new stuff
-to Linus for merging into the mainline tree.  After the two weeks, the
-merge window is closed, and it is called/tagged ``-rc1``.  No new
-features get mainlined after this -- only fixes to the rc1 content are
-expected.  After roughly a week of collecting fixes to the rc1 content,
-rc2 is released.  This repeats on a roughly weekly basis until rc7
-(typically; sometimes rc6 if things are quiet, or rc8 if things are in a
-state of churn), and a week after the last vX.Y-rcN was done, the
-official vX.Y is released.
-
-Relating that to netdev: At the beginning of the 2-week merge window,
-the ``net-next`` tree will be closed - no new changes/features.  The
-accumulated new content of the past ~10 weeks will be passed onto
-mainline/Linus via a pull request for vX.Y -- at the same time, the
-``net`` tree will start accumulating fixes for this pulled content
-relating to vX.Y
-
-An announcement indicating when ``net-next`` has been closed is usually
-sent to netdev, but knowing the above, you can predict that in advance.
-
-.. warning::
-  Do not send new ``net-next`` content to netdev during the
-  period during which ``net-next`` tree is closed.
-
-RFC patches sent for review only are obviously welcome at any time
-(use ``--subject-prefix='RFC net-next'`` with ``git format-patch``).
-
-Shortly after the two weeks have passed (and vX.Y-rc1 is released), the
-tree for ``net-next`` reopens to collect content for the next (vX.Y+1)
-release.
-
-If you aren't subscribed to netdev and/or are simply unsure if
-``net-next`` has re-opened yet, simply check the ``net-next`` git
-repository link above for any new networking-related commits.  You may
-also check the following website for the current status:
-
-  http://vger.kernel.org/~davem/net-next.html
-
-The ``net`` tree continues to collect fixes for the vX.Y content, and is
-fed back to Linus at regular (~weekly) intervals.  Meaning that the
-focus for ``net`` is on stabilization and bug fixes.
-
-Finally, the vX.Y gets released, and the whole cycle starts over.
-
-So where are we now in this cycle?
-----------------------------------
-
-Load the mainline (Linus) page here:
-
-  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
-
-and note the top of the "tags" section.  If it is rc1, it is early in
-the dev cycle.  If it was tagged rc7 a week ago, then a release is
-probably imminent. If the most recent tag is a final release tag
-(without an ``-rcN`` suffix) - we are most likely in a merge window
-and ``net-next`` is closed.
-
-How can I tell the status of a patch I've sent?
------------------------------------------------
-Start by looking at the main patchworks queue for netdev:
-
-  https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/
-
-The "State" field will tell you exactly where things are at with your
-patch. Patches are indexed by the ``Message-ID`` header of the emails
-which carried them so if you have trouble finding your patch append
-the value of ``Message-ID`` to the URL above.
-
-How long before my patch is accepted?
--------------------------------------
-Generally speaking, the patches get triaged quickly (in less than
-48h). But be patient, if your patch is active in patchwork (i.e. it's
-listed on the project's patch list) the chances it was missed are close to zero.
-Asking the maintainer for status updates on your
-patch is a good way to ensure your patch is ignored or pushed to the
-bottom of the priority list.
-
-Should I directly update patchwork state of my own patches?
------------------------------------------------------------
-It may be tempting to help the maintainers and update the state of your
-own patches when you post a new version or spot a bug. Please do not do that.
-Interfering with the patch status on patchwork will only cause confusion. Leave
-it to the maintainer to figure out what is the most recent and current
-version that should be applied. If there is any doubt, the maintainer
-will reply and ask what should be done.
-
-I made changes to only a few patches in a patch series should I resend only those changed?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-No, please resend the entire patch series and make sure you do number your
-patches such that it is clear this is the latest and greatest set of patches
-that can be applied.
-
-I have received review feedback, when should I post a revised version of the patches?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Allow at least 24 hours to pass between postings. This will ensure reviewers
-from all geographical locations have a chance to chime in. Do not wait
-too long (weeks) between postings either as it will make it harder for reviewers
-to recall all the context.
-
-Make sure you address all the feedback in your new posting. Do not post a new
-version of the code if the discussion about the previous version is still
-ongoing, unless directly instructed by a reviewer.
-
-I submitted multiple versions of a patch series and it looks like a version other than the last one has been accepted, what should I do?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-There is no revert possible, once it is pushed out, it stays like that.
-Please send incremental versions on top of what has been merged in order to fix
-the patches the way they would look like if your latest patch series was to be
-merged.
-
-Are there special rules regarding stable submissions on netdev?
----------------------------------------------------------------
-While it used to be the case that netdev submissions were not supposed
-to carry explicit ``CC: stable@vger.kernel.org`` tags that is no longer
-the case today. Please follow the standard stable rules in
-:ref:`Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst <stable_kernel_rules>`,
-and make sure you include appropriate Fixes tags!
-
-Is the comment style convention different for the networking content?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-Yes, in a largely trivial way.  Instead of this::
-
-  /*
-   * foobar blah blah blah
-   * another line of text
-   */
-
-it is requested that you make it look like this::
-
-  /* foobar blah blah blah
-   * another line of text
-   */
-
-I am working in existing code which uses non-standard formatting. Which formatting should I use?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Make your code follow the most recent guidelines, so that eventually all code
-in the domain of netdev is in the preferred format.
-
-I found a bug that might have possible security implications or similar. Should I mail the main netdev maintainer off-list?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-No. The current netdev maintainer has consistently requested that
-people use the mailing lists and not reach out directly.  If you aren't
-OK with that, then perhaps consider mailing security@kernel.org or
-reading about http://oss-security.openwall.org/wiki/mailing-lists/distros
-as possible alternative mechanisms.
-
-What level of testing is expected before I submit my change?
-------------------------------------------------------------
-At the very minimum your changes must survive an ``allyesconfig`` and an
-``allmodconfig`` build with ``W=1`` set without new warnings or failures.
-
-Ideally you will have done run-time testing specific to your change,
-and the patch series contains a set of kernel selftest for
-``tools/testing/selftests/net`` or using the KUnit framework.
-
-You are expected to test your changes on top of the relevant networking
-tree (``net`` or ``net-next``) and not e.g. a stable tree or ``linux-next``.
-
-How do I post corresponding changes to user space components?
--------------------------------------------------------------
-User space code exercising kernel features should be posted
-alongside kernel patches. This gives reviewers a chance to see
-how any new interface is used and how well it works.
-
-When user space tools reside in the kernel repo itself all changes
-should generally come as one series. If series becomes too large
-or the user space project is not reviewed on netdev include a link
-to a public repo where user space patches can be seen.
-
-In case user space tooling lives in a separate repository but is
-reviewed on netdev  (e.g. patches to ``iproute2`` tools) kernel and
-user space patches should form separate series (threads) when posted
-to the mailing list, e.g.::
-
-  [PATCH net-next 0/3] net: some feature cover letter
-   └─ [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: some feature prep
-   └─ [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: some feature do it
-   └─ [PATCH net-next 3/3] selftest: net: some feature
-
-  [PATCH iproute2-next] ip: add support for some feature
-
-Posting as one thread is discouraged because it confuses patchwork
-(as of patchwork 2.2.2).
-
-Can I reproduce the checks from patchwork on my local machine?
---------------------------------------------------------------
-
-Checks in patchwork are mostly simple wrappers around existing kernel
-scripts, the sources are available at:
-
-https://github.com/kuba-moo/nipa/tree/master/tests
-
-Running all the builds and checks locally is a pain, can I post my patches and have the patchwork bot validate them?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-No, you must ensure that your patches are ready by testing them locally
-before posting to the mailing list. The patchwork build bot instance
-gets overloaded very easily and netdev@vger really doesn't need more
-traffic if we can help it.
-
-netdevsim is great, can I extend it for my out-of-tree tests?
--------------------------------------------------------------
-
-No, ``netdevsim`` is a test vehicle solely for upstream tests.
-(Please add your tests under ``tools/testing/selftests/``.)
-
-We also give no guarantees that ``netdevsim`` won't change in the future
-in a way which would break what would normally be considered uAPI.
-
-Is netdevsim considered a "user" of an API?
--------------------------------------------
-
-Linux kernel has a long standing rule that no API should be added unless
-it has a real, in-tree user. Mock-ups and tests based on ``netdevsim`` are
-strongly encouraged when adding new APIs, but ``netdevsim`` in itself
-is **not** considered a use case/user.
-
-Any other tips to help ensure my net/net-next patch gets OK'd?
---------------------------------------------------------------
-Attention to detail.  Re-read your own work as if you were the
-reviewer.  You can start with using ``checkpatch.pl``, perhaps even with
-the ``--strict`` flag.  But do not be mindlessly robotic in doing so.
-If your change is a bug fix, make sure your commit log indicates the
-end-user visible symptom, the underlying reason as to why it happens,
-and then if necessary, explain why the fix proposed is the best way to
-get things done.  Don't mangle whitespace, and as is common, don't
-mis-indent function arguments that span multiple lines.  If it is your
-first patch, mail it to yourself so you can test apply it to an
-unpatched tree to confirm infrastructure didn't mangle it.
-
-Finally, go back and read
-:ref:`Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst <submittingpatches>`
-to be sure you are not repeating some common mistake documented there.