diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/filesystems/bcachefs/SubmittingPatches.rst')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/filesystems/bcachefs/SubmittingPatches.rst | 105 |
1 files changed, 105 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/bcachefs/SubmittingPatches.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/bcachefs/SubmittingPatches.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..18c79d548391 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/bcachefs/SubmittingPatches.rst @@ -0,0 +1,105 @@ +Submitting patches to bcachefs +============================== + +Here are suggestions for submitting patches to bcachefs subsystem. + +Submission checklist +-------------------- + +Patches must be tested before being submitted, either with the xfstests suite +[0]_, or the full bcachefs test suite in ktest [1]_, depending on what's being +touched. Note that ktest wraps xfstests and will be an easier method to running +it for most users; it includes single-command wrappers for all the mainstream +in-kernel local filesystems. + +Patches will undergo more testing after being merged (including +lockdep/kasan/preempt/etc. variants), these are not generally required to be +run by the submitter - but do put some thought into what you're changing and +which tests might be relevant, e.g. are you dealing with tricky memory layout +work? kasan, are you doing locking work? then lockdep; and ktest includes +single-command variants for the debug build types you'll most likely need. + +The exception to this rule is incomplete WIP/RFC patches: if you're working on +something nontrivial, it's encouraged to send out a WIP patch to let people +know what you're doing and make sure you're on the right track. Just make sure +it includes a brief note as to what's done and what's incomplete, to avoid +confusion. + +Rigorous checkpatch.pl adherence is not required (many of its warnings are +considered out of date), but try not to deviate too much without reason. + +Focus on writing code that reads well and is organized well; code should be +aesthetically pleasing. + +CI +-- + +Instead of running your tests locally, when running the full test suite it's +preferable to let a server farm do it in parallel, and then have the results +in a nice test dashboard (which can tell you which failures are new, and +presents results in a git log view, avoiding the need for most bisecting). + +That exists [2]_, and community members may request an account. If you work for +a big tech company, you'll need to help out with server costs to get access - +but the CI is not restricted to running bcachefs tests: it runs any ktest test +(which generally makes it easy to wrap other tests that can run in qemu). + +Other things to think about +--------------------------- + +- How will we debug this code? Is there sufficient introspection to diagnose + when something starts acting wonky on a user machine? + + We don't necessarily need every single field of every data structure visible + with introspection, but having the important fields of all the core data + types wired up makes debugging drastically easier - a bit of thoughtful + foresight greatly reduces the need to have people build custom kernels with + debug patches. + + More broadly, think about all the debug tooling that might be needed. + +- Does it make the codebase more or less of a mess? Can we also try to do some + organizing, too? + +- Do new tests need to be written? New assertions? How do we know and verify + that the code is correct, and what happens if something goes wrong? + + We don't yet have automated code coverage analysis or easy fault injection - + but for now, pretend we did and ask what they might tell us. + + Assertions are hugely important, given that we don't yet have a systems + language that can do ergonomic embedded correctness proofs. Hitting an assert + in testing is much better than wandering off into undefined behaviour la-la + land - use them. Use them judiciously, and not as a replacement for proper + error handling, but use them. + +- Does it need to be performance tested? Should we add new performance counters? + + bcachefs has a set of persistent runtime counters which can be viewed with + the 'bcachefs fs top' command; this should give users a basic idea of what + their filesystem is currently doing. If you're doing a new feature or looking + at old code, think if anything should be added. + +- If it's a new on disk format feature - have upgrades and downgrades been + tested? (Automated tests exists but aren't in the CI, due to the hassle of + disk image management; coordinate to have them run.) + +Mailing list, IRC +----------------- + +Patches should hit the list [3]_, but much discussion and code review happens +on IRC as well [4]_; many people appreciate the more conversational approach +and quicker feedback. + +Additionally, we have a lively user community doing excellent QA work, which +exists primarily on IRC. Please make use of that resource; user feedback is +important for any nontrivial feature, and documenting it in commit messages +would be a good idea. + +.. rubric:: References + +.. [0] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git +.. [1] https://evilpiepirate.org/git/ktest.git/ +.. [2] https://evilpiepirate.org/~testdashboard/ci/ +.. [3] linux-bcachefs@vger.kernel.org +.. [4] irc.oftc.net#bcache, #bcachefs-dev |