Pull documentation updates from Jonathan Corbet:
"A reasonably busy cycle for docs, including:
- Lots of work on the Chinese and Italian translations
- Some license-rules clarifications from Christoph
- Various build-script fixes
- A new document on memory models
- RST conversion of the live-patching docs
- The usual collection of typo fixes and corrections"
* tag 'docs-5.2' of git://git.lwn.net/linux: (140 commits)
docs/livepatch: Unify style of livepatch documentation in the ReST format
docs: livepatch: convert docs to ReST and rename to *.rst
scripts/documentation-file-ref-check: detect broken :doc:`foo`
scripts/documentation-file-ref-check: don't parse Next/ dir
LICENSES: Rename other to deprecated
LICENSES: Clearly mark dual license only licenses
docs: Don't reference the ZLib license in license-rules.rst
docs/vm: Minor editorial changes in the THP and hugetlbfs
docs/vm: add documentation of memory models
doc:it_IT: translation alignment
doc: fix typo in PGP guide
dontdiff: update with Kconfig build artifacts
docs/zh_CN: fix typos in 1.Intro.rst file
docs/zh_CN: redirect CoC docs to Chinese version
doc: mm: migration doesn't use FOLL_SPLIT anymore
docs: doc-guide: remove the extension from .rst files
doc: kselftest: Fix KBUILD_OUTPUT usage instructions
docs: trace: fix some Sphinx warnings
docs: speculation.txt: mark example blocks as such
docs: ntb.txt: add blank lines to clean up some Sphinx warnings
...
Make it clear in the directory name that these are not intended for new
code.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Just like the CDDL the Apache license and the MPL must only be used as
a choice in additional to an GPL2 compatible license. Copy over the
boilerplate from the CDDL file to the other two after fixing it up to
make it clear the licenses need to be GPL2 compatible, not just the
more generic GPL compatible. For example the Apache 2 license is GPL3
compatible, but that doesn't matter for the kernel.
Also move these licenses to a separate directory and document the rules
in license-rules.rst.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
We never had a file called LICENSES/other/ZLib in the tree, so don't
reference it. Instead mention the GPL v1 as an (bad) example.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
It's unnecessary to point to an external mirror of the Documentation
directory.
Jonathan Corbet writes in favor of removing this entry, instead of
moving it under "Docs at the Linux Kernel tree":
> We don't want to turn kernel-docs.rst into yet another out-of-date
> index for the rest of Documentation/, and the removal of the external
> URL takes away the only bit of additional information that this entry
> offers.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Neuschäfer <j.neuschaefer@gmx.net>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Currently support for 64-bit sector_t and blkcnt_t is optional on 32-bit
architectures. These types are required to support block device and/or
file sizes larger than 2 TiB, and have generally defaulted to on for
a long time. Enabling the option only increases the i386 tinyconfig
size by 145 bytes, and many data structures already always use
64-bit values for their in-core and on-disk data structures anyway,
so there should not be a large change in dynamic memory usage either.
Dropping this option removes a somewhat weird non-default config that
has cause various bugs or compiler warnings when actually used.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Signed-off-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Generic allocation functions already emit a dump_stack()
so additional error logging isn't useful.
Document it as such and add a reference to the allocation
API.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
The documentation for Co-developed-by is a bit light on details, e.g. it
doesn't explicitly state that:
- Multiple Co-developed-by tags are perfectly acceptable
- Co-developed-by and Signed-off-by must be paired together
- SOB ordering should still follow standard sign-off procedure
Lack of explicit direction has resulted in developers taking a variety
of approaches, often lacking any intent whatsoever, e.g. scattering SOBs
willy-nilly, collecting them all at the end or the beginning, etc...
Tweak the wording to make it clear that multiple co-authors are allowed,
and document the expectation that standard sign-off procedures are to
be followed.
The use of "original author" has also led to confusion as many patches
don't have just one "original" author, e.g. when multiple developers
are involved from the genesis of the patch. Remove all usage of
"original" and instead call out that Co-developed-by is simply a way to
provide attribution in addition to the From tag, i.e. neither tag is
intended to imply anything with regard to who did what.
Provide examples to (hopefully) eliminate any ambiguity.
Cc: Tobin C. Harding <me@tobin.cc>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz <jorge.ramirez-ortiz@linaro.org>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
The instructions for generating patches are given as shell commands
with variables as placeholders. They use the syntax "SRCTREE= linux",
which is wrong for the Bourne shell family (it runs the command
"linux" with the variable "SRCTREE" set to the empty string).
Remove the spaces to avoid confusion. This breaks the pretty alignment
but helps new contributors who try to run the commands as written.
Signed-off-by: Tom Levy <tomlevy93@gmail.com>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Translated documents:
- stable-kernel-rules.rst
- deprecated.rst
- kernel-enforcement-statement.rst
- license-rules.rst
Added document to have valid links
- netdev-FAQ.rst
Modifications to main documentation
- add label in deprecated.rst
Signed-off-by: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Pull documentation updates from Jonathan Corbet:
"A fairly routine cycle for docs - lots of typo fixes, some new
documents, and more translations. There's also some LICENSES
adjustments from Thomas"
* tag 'docs-5.1' of git://git.lwn.net/linux: (74 commits)
docs: Bring some order to filesystem documentation
Documentation/locking/lockdep: Drop last two chars of sample states
doc: rcu: Suspicious RCU usage is a warning
docs: driver-api: iio: fix errors in documentation
Documentation/process/howto: Update for 4.x -> 5.x versioning
docs: Explicitly state that the 'Fixes:' tag shouldn't split lines
doc: security: Add kern-doc for lsm_hooks.h
doc: sctp: Merge and clean up rst files
Docs: Correct /proc/stat path
scripts/spdxcheck.py: fix C++ comment style detection
doc: fix typos in license-rules.rst
Documentation: fix admin-guide/README.rst minimum gcc version requirement
doc: process: complete removal of info about -git patches
doc: translations: sync translations 'remove info about -git patches'
perf-security: wrap paragraphs on 72 columns
perf-security: elaborate on perf_events/Perf privileged users
perf-security: document collected perf_events/Perf data categories
perf-security: document perf_events/Perf resource control
sysfs.txt: add note on available attribute macros
docs: kernel-doc: typo "if ... if" -> "if ... is"
...
This Kconfig option was removed during v4.19 development in commit
771c035372 ("deprecate the '__deprecated' attribute warnings entirely
and for good") so there's no point to keep it in defconfigs any longer.
FWIW defconfigs were patched with:
--------------------------->8----------------------
find . -name *_defconfig -exec sed -i '/CONFIG_ENABLE_WARN_DEPRECATED/d' {} \;
--------------------------->8----------------------
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190128152434.41969-1-abrodkin@synopsys.com
Signed-off-by: Alexey Brodkin <abrodkin@synopsys.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
As linux-5.0 is coming up soon, the howto.rst document can be
updated for the new kernel version. Instead of changing all 4.x
references to 5.x, this time we git rid of all explicit version
numbers and rework some kernel trees' name to keep the docs
current and real.
Signed-off-by: Zenghui Yu <zenghuiyu96@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
...and use a commit with an obnoxiously long summary in the example to
make it abundantly clear that keeping the tag on a single line takes
priority over wrapping at 75 columns. Without the explicit exemption,
one might assume splitting the tag is acceptable, even encouraged, e.g.
due to being conditioned by checkpatch's line length warning.
Per Stephen's scripts[1] and implied by commit bf4daf12a9 ("checkpatch:
avoid some commit message long line warnings"), splitting the 'Fixes:'
tag across multiple lines is a no-no, presumably because parsing multi-
line tags is unnecessarily painful.
[1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190216183433.71b7cfa7@canb.auug.org.au
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
The patches fixes some typos in process/license-rules.rst
Signed-off-by: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
The following patch forgot to remove a reference to the -git
patches
commit 2c71d305ca ("docs: process: Remove outdated info about -git patches")
This patch complete the removal and update all translations
Signed-off-by: Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@vaga.pv.it>
Acked-by: SeongJae Park <sj38.park@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
As linux-5.0.x is coming up soon, the documentation should match,
in particular the README.rst file, so change all 4.x references
accordingly. There was a mix of lowercase and uppercase X here,
which I changed to using lowercase consistently.
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
The original MODULE_LICENSE string for kernel modules licensed under the
GPL v2 (only / or later) was simply "GPL", which was - and still is -
completely sufficient for the purpose of module loading and checking
whether the module is free software or proprietary.
In January 2003 this was changed with commit 3344ea3ad4b7 ("[PATCH]
MODULE_LICENSE and EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL support"). This commit can be found in
the history git repository which holds the 1:1 import of Linus' bitkeeper
repository:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tglx/history.git/commit/?id=3344ea3ad4b7c302c846a680dbaeedf96ed45c02
The main intention of the patch was to refuse linking proprietary modules
against symbols exported with EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() at module load time.
As a completely undocumented side effect it also introduced the distinction
between "GPL" and "GPL v2" MODULE_LICENSE() strings:
* "GPL" [GNU Public License v2 or later]
* "GPL v2" [GNU Public License v2]
* "GPL and additional rights" [GNU Public License v2 rights and more]
* "Dual BSD/GPL" [GNU Public License v2
* or BSD license choice]
* "Dual MPL/GPL" [GNU Public License v2
* or Mozilla license choice]
This distinction was and still is wrong in several aspects:
1) It broke all modules which were using the "GPL" string in the
MODULE_LICENSE() already and were licensed under GPL v2 only.
A quick license scan over the tree at that time shows that at least 480
out of 1484 modules have been affected by this change back then. The
number is probably way higher as this was just a quick check for
clearly identifiable license information.
There was exactly ONE instance of a "GPL v2" module license string in
the kernel back then - drivers/net/tulip/xircom_tulip_cb.c which
otherwise had no license information at all. There is no indication
that the change above is any way related to this driver. The change
happend with the 2.4.11 release which was on Oct. 9 2001 - so quite
some time before the above commit. Unfortunately there is no trace on
the intertubes to any discussion of this.
2) The dual licensed strings became ill defined as well because following
the "GPL" vs. "GPL v2" distinction all dual licensed (or additional
rights) MODULE_LICENSE strings would either require those dual licensed
modules to be licensed under GPL v2 or later or just be unspecified for
the dual licensing case. Neither choice is coherent with the GPL
distinction.
Due to the lack of a proper changelog and no real discussion on the patch
submission other than a few implementation details, it's completely unclear
why this distinction was introduced at all. Other than the comment in the
module header file exists no documentation for this at all.
From a license compliance and license scanning POV this distinction is a
total nightmare.
As of 5.0-rc2 2873 out of 9200 instances of MODULE_LICENSE() strings are
conflicting with the actual license in the source code (either SPDX or
license boilerplate/reference). A comparison between the scan of the
history tree and a scan of current Linus tree shows to the extent that the
git rename detection over Linus tree grafted with the history tree is
halfways complete that almost none of the files which got broken in 2003
have been cleaned up vs. the MODULE_LICENSE string. So subtracting those
480 known instances from the conflicting 2800 of today more than 25% of the
module authors got it wrong and it's a high propability that a large
portion of the rest just got it right by chance.
There is no value for the module loader to convey the detailed license
information as the only decision to be made is whether the module is free
software or not.
The "and additional rights", "BSD" and "MPL" strings are not conclusive
license information either. So there is no point in trying to make the GPL
part conclusive and exact. As shown above it's already non conclusive for
dual licensing and incoherent with a large portion of the module source.
As an unintended side effect this distinction causes a major headache for
license compliance, license scanners and the ongoing effort to clean up the
license mess of the kernel.
Therefore remove the well meant, but ill defined, distinction between "GPL"
and "GPL v2" and document that:
- "GPL" and "GPL v2" both express that the module is licensed under GPLv2
(without a distinction of 'only' and 'or later') and is therefore kernel
license compliant.
- None of the MODULE_LICENSE strings can be used for expressing or
determining the exact license
- Their sole purpose is to decide whether the module is free software or
not.
Add a MODULE_LICENSE subsection to the license rule documentation as well.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Acked-by: Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com>
Acked-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
[jc: Did s/merily/merely/ ]
Acked-by: Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Drivers under MIT, BSD-17-clause, or uncle-Bob's-newest-take-on-PD are
all fine, not just GPL.
Signed-off-by: Adam Borowski <kilobyte@angband.pl>
[jc: fixed conflict and refilled paragraph]
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
The networking maintainer keeps a public list of the patches being
queued up for the next round of stable releases. Be sure to check there
before asking for a patch to be applied so that you do not waste
people's time.
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Acked-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
