|  | Everything you ever wanted to know about Linux 2.6 -stable releases. | 
|  |  | 
|  | Rules on what kind of patches are accepted, and which ones are not, into the | 
|  | "-stable" tree: | 
|  |  | 
|  | - It must be obviously correct and tested. | 
|  | - It can not be bigger than 100 lines, with context. | 
|  | - It must fix only one thing. | 
|  | - It must fix a real bug that bothers people (not a, "This could be a | 
|  | problem..." type thing). | 
|  | - It must fix a problem that causes a build error (but not for things | 
|  | marked CONFIG_BROKEN), an oops, a hang, data corruption, a real | 
|  | security issue, or some "oh, that's not good" issue.  In short, something | 
|  | critical. | 
|  | - No "theoretical race condition" issues, unless an explanation of how the | 
|  | race can be exploited is also provided. | 
|  | - It can not contain any "trivial" fixes in it (spelling changes, | 
|  | whitespace cleanups, etc). | 
|  | - It must be accepted by the relevant subsystem maintainer. | 
|  | - It must follow the Documentation/SubmittingPatches rules. | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | Procedure for submitting patches to the -stable tree: | 
|  |  | 
|  | - Send the patch, after verifying that it follows the above rules, to | 
|  | stable@kernel.org. | 
|  | - The sender will receive an ACK when the patch has been accepted into the | 
|  | queue, or a NAK if the patch is rejected.  This response might take a few | 
|  | days, according to the developer's schedules. | 
|  | - If accepted, the patch will be added to the -stable queue, for review by | 
|  | other developers. | 
|  | - Security patches should not be sent to this alias, but instead to the | 
|  | documented security@kernel.org address. | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | 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. | 
|  | - At the end of the review cycle, the ACKed patches will be added to the | 
|  | latest -stable release, and a new -stable release will happen. | 
|  | - 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. | 
|  |  | 
|  |  | 
|  | Review committe: | 
|  |  | 
|  | - This is made up of a number of kernel developers who have volunteered for | 
|  | this task, and a few that haven't. |