### Author:  [@eiis1000](https://discourse.nixos.org/u/eiis1000)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2026, 4:19pm UTC](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-for-faster-kernel-updates/76937/1 "2026-04-09T16:19:39Z")
Recently I’ve been needing the latest rc kernel quite often, but for the past couple months (since I started checking) it has seemed that [the kernels-org file on master](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/bffca1e7cbc2b9880f193923f759f0d683873f2e/pkgs/os-specific/linux/kernel/kernels-org.json) is regularly over a week out of date (which leaves nixos-unstable even more out of date). Obviously I could (and I often do) just override the version myself, but I wanted to ask: would it be ok for me to simply PR updates to the kernel version? The reason I ask rather than just doing it is that I can’t find precedent and it’s obviously a super critical part of the codebase.
---
### Author:  [@magicquark](https://discourse.nixos.org/u/magicquark)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2026, 8:08pm UTC](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-for-faster-kernel-updates/76937/2 "2026-04-09T20:08:04Z")
> [@eiis1000](#):
>
> it has seemed that [the kernels-org file on master](https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/bffca1e7cbc2b9880f193923f759f0d683873f2e/pkgs/os-specific/linux/kernel/kernels-org.json) is regularly over a week out of date
Updates to the kernel go to `staging-nixos` first.
> [@eiis1000](#):
>
> would it be ok for me to simply PR updates to the kernel version? The reason I ask rather than just doing it is that I can’t find precedent
There are PRs that set precedence for this:
>
>
> \## Things done
>
>
>
> \- Built on platform:
> - \[\] x86\_64-linux
> - \[x\] aarch6…4-linux
> - \[\] x86\_64-darwin
> - \[\] aarch64-darwin
> \- Tested, as applicable:
> - \[\] \[NixOS tests\] in \[nixos/tests\].
> - \[x\] \[Package tests\] at \`passthru.tests\`.
> - \[\] Tests in \[lib/tests\] or \[pkgs/test\] for functions and "core" functionality.
> \- \[\] Ran \`nixpkgs-review\` on this PR. See \[nixpkgs-review usage\].
> \- \[\] Tested basic functionality of all binary files, usually in \`./result/bin/\`.
> \- Nixpkgs Release Notes
> - \[\] Package update: when the change is major or breaking.
> \- NixOS Release Notes
> - \[\] Module addition: when adding a new NixOS module.
> - \[\] Module update: when the change is significant.
> \- \[x\] Fits \[CONTRIBUTING.md\], \[pkgs/README.md\], \[maintainers/README.md\] and other READMEs.
>
> \[NixOS tests\]: https://nixos.org/manual/nixos/unstable/index.html#sec-nixos-tests
> \[Package tests\]: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/README.md#package-tests
> \[nixpkgs-review usage\]: https://github.com/Mic92/nixpkgs-review#usage
>
> \[CONTRIBUTING.md\]: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
> \[lib/tests\]: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/lib/tests
> \[maintainers/README.md\]: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/maintainers/README.md
> \[nixos/tests\]: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/nixos/tests
> \[pkgs/README.md\]: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/README.md
> \[pkgs/test\]: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/blob/master/pkgs/test
>
> cc @NixOS/linux-kernel
There is a kernel team, so cc-ing them would be best in your PR, as is done in the above PR.
* * *
For what it is worth, if you want to be bleeding edge, keep doing as you have been doing. Upstream `nixpkgs` will always lag behind for good reasons (testing).
---
### Author:  [@tejing](https://discourse.nixos.org/u/tejing)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2026, 9:00pm UTC](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-for-faster-kernel-updates/76937/3 "2026-04-09T21:00:18Z")
I’m not sure you could get PRs through much faster than they already are with the current CI structure, since kernel updates have to go through staging-nixos due to affecting every nixos test.
---
### Author:  [@tree-sapii](https://discourse.nixos.org/u/tree-sapii)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2026, 9:48pm UTC](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-for-faster-kernel-updates/76937/4 "2026-04-09T21:48:45Z")
They are usually a week old because nixos-unstable requires almost 2 extra days for tests outside of the ~3 day build time on nixpkgs-unstable.
---
### Author:  [@eiis1000](https://discourse.nixos.org/u/eiis1000)
#### Post date: [April 10, 2026, 3:09am UTC](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-for-faster-kernel-updates/76937/5 "2026-04-10T03:09:02Z")
> [@magicquark](#):
>
> Updates to the kernel go to `staging-nixos` first.
Sure, but at time of writing both staging-nixos and master are on 7.0-rc6 while 7.0-rc7 came out 4 days ago.
> [@magicquark](#):
>
> There are PRs that set precedent for this:
>
> There is a kernel team, so cc-ing them would be best in your PR, as is done in the above PR.
I’m not sure how I missed that! Thanks for your help 🙂
---
### Author:  [@vcunat](https://discourse.nixos.org/u/vcunat)
#### Post date: [April 10, 2026, 4:56am UTC](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-for-faster-kernel-updates/76937/6 "2026-04-10T04:56:06Z")
But the -rc kernels aren’t used in many tests, right? I don’t think the `staging-nixos` way is needed in _that particular_ case.
---
### Author:  [@tejing](https://discourse.nixos.org/u/tejing)
#### Post date: [April 10, 2026, 1:28pm UTC](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-for-faster-kernel-updates/76937/7 "2026-04-10T13:28:51Z")
Good point. Not sure if there are other problems, though.
---
### Author:  [@qyliss](https://discourse.nixos.org/u/qyliss)
#### Post date: [April 15, 2026, 4:02pm UTC](https://discourse.nixos.org/t/prs-for-faster-kernel-updates/76937/8 "2026-04-15T16:02:36Z")
I don’t think anybody in the kernel team is running the update script whenever an rc kernel is released. You are very welcome to submit PRs to master updating linux\_testing.