Re: Linking Patchwork with Sashiko?

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>]

On Wed, 15 Jul 2026 23:28:08 +0300
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote:

> > > Flipping the argument, should contributors be obliged to do extra work
> > > that make them feel diminished as a human ? I'm talking here about
> > > justifying themselves against LLM arguments that have not been analyzed
> > > by a maintainer first.  
> > 
> > You write here about "feeling diminished" or "justifying themselves" and
> > I'm not sure I get it. If you get a complaint from some CI running
> > checkpatch or say coverity which is bogus (or perhaps correct?), do you
> > also feel diminished or needing to justify? I just don't see how LLMs are
> > different here...  
> 
> No, I don't get the same feeling. This is due to multiple factors. One
> of them is due to the more deterministic nature of those tools. I know a
> build failure from the 0day bot is a build failure. I know what warnings
> from checkpatch can be ignored in a given subsystem. 

Not quite true: smatch is not deterministic: it depends on a database
it builds from previous runs.

	https://github.com/error27/smatch/blob/master/Documentation/smatch.rst#using-smatch

> I know that I can
> reply to some reported issues saying they're false positives and won't
> be asked for a full justification.

Just like any bot review, there's no need to justify obvious things,
but the way to make reviewers/maintainers aware of false positives is
to reply. That's how our process have been working all those years.

Thanks,
Mauro