From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9435377039; Sat, 16 May 2026 13:45:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778939125; cv=none; b=L/DJqfhooRpJvlxZMwAIURl8RZRnhIUxA8OduZ03Aediqdy5ksSZ9TYgEEAwDXgLIAph/MLhyq+AnerzudmaoBiL4tK08fJo04UhsglJYV9SO6bjVjXP/mdyfyE0yx4d6x45RvM8U0SnL63ksswbnZPZql4UCgAqgYONgqa/kEg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778939125; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OswlLe1KSclxaV0S5vblbPI4rDXsx9FDUOK7BzOD/yE=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=HQHBCt52J7co2pG8Rw5bdvhTRSFI/+7voCCz2MERy+5fA3q1KDZB6YnakiQ8nJPtpmY0PvKo2nOClbbWhmHYqjmKQJ/IG9EPQLzLy4Q7IlNZ2nDqr/s6yav3iap7VPJcsXSxzk1uGvaXkx35h2r3OsgYTu7/c6wKZ3tiAoZPj8c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=YreJNu01; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="YreJNu01" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 62236C19425; Sat, 16 May 2026 13:45:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1778939125; bh=OswlLe1KSclxaV0S5vblbPI4rDXsx9FDUOK7BzOD/yE=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=YreJNu01OKSeELR7+5TgG7OPVIcrWErAx3vh2hoLilWqbcgZrV1mTJc8ya7/wJB1y 3LY3jNzeXc0NlYFPuiYeppBb0U8PtPjH0yq4xcf+YHFhkNUtTtOxOc/romtdQ9ZClQ t7UoCobNFLiangxY3Rp0/hrB09zQcMYzrTAwx/8ITHGHfamwx7tfMkOOsEzfXbbhIc Ef5ymoQzKCCgEVp/Gvv1If5utssqtecr2afnJ1mFLa1STsHNmZ+ZV3QgE1Fn+gaZKN EpcWOLOkUQDscsJIPB1OrzcoPHNlUmkuAtTZ8Uvzl8H/kh/pB5KMBGdl/reGFIuiOZ yUMfhzGi7WFyw== Message-ID: <2fe010ea-1c73-429f-8baa-0158a4afade1@kernel.org> Date: Sat, 16 May 2026 15:45:21 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Stop false review statements To: Laurent Pinchart Cc: Guenter Roeck , sashiko-bot@kernel.org, sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev, sashiko@lists.linux.dev, Linux Kernel Workflows , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , kfree@google.com References: <221cc52e-9918-43ea-b196-622a8cc6db05@kernel.org> <20260516132407.GA163589@killaraus.ideasonboard.com> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski Content-Language: en-US Autocrypt: addr=krzk@kernel.org; keydata= xsFNBFVDQq4BEAC6KeLOfFsAvFMBsrCrJ2bCalhPv5+KQF2PS2+iwZI8BpRZoV+Bd5kWvN79 cFgcqTTuNHjAvxtUG8pQgGTHAObYs6xeYJtjUH0ZX6ndJ33FJYf5V3yXqqjcZ30FgHzJCFUu JMp7PSyMPzpUXfU12yfcRYVEMQrmplNZssmYhiTeVicuOOypWugZKVLGNm0IweVCaZ/DJDIH gNbpvVwjcKYrx85m9cBVEBUGaQP6AT7qlVCkrf50v8bofSIyVa2xmubbAwwFA1oxoOusjPIE J3iadrwpFvsZjF5uHAKS+7wHLoW9hVzOnLbX6ajk5Hf8Pb1m+VH/E8bPBNNYKkfTtypTDUCj NYcd27tjnXfG+SDs/EXNUAIRefCyvaRG7oRYF3Ec+2RgQDRnmmjCjoQNbFrJvJkFHlPeHaeS BosGY+XWKydnmsfY7SSnjAzLUGAFhLd/XDVpb1Een2XucPpKvt9ORF+48gy12FA5GduRLhQU vK4tU7ojoem/G23PcowM1CwPurC8sAVsQb9KmwTGh7rVz3ks3w/zfGBy3+WmLg++C2Wct6nM Pd8/6CBVjEWqD06/RjI2AnjIq5fSEH/BIfXXfC68nMp9BZoy3So4ZsbOlBmtAPvMYX6U8VwD TNeBxJu5Ex0Izf1NV9CzC3nNaFUYOY8KfN01X5SExAoVTr09ewARAQABzSVLcnp5c3p0b2Yg S296bG93c2tpIDxrcnprQGtlcm5lbC5vcmc+wsGVBBMBCgA/AhsDBgsJCAcDAgYVCAIJCgsE FgIDAQIeAQIXgBYhBJvQfg4MUfjVlne3VBuTQ307QWKbBQJoF1BKBQkWlnSaAAoJEBuTQ307 QWKbHukP/3t4tRp/bvDnxJfmNdNVn0gv9ep3L39IntPalBFwRKytqeQkzAju0whYWg+R/rwp +r2I1Fzwt7+PTjsnMFlh1AZxGDmP5MFkzVsMnfX1lGiXhYSOMP97XL6R1QSXxaWOpGNCDaUl ajorB0lJDcC0q3xAdwzRConxYVhlgmTrRiD8oLlSCD5baEAt5Zw17UTNDnDGmZQKR0fqLpWy 786Lm5OScb7DjEgcA2PRm17st4UQ1kF0rQHokVaotxRM74PPDB8bCsunlghJl1DRK9s1aSuN hL1Pv9VD8b4dFNvCo7b4hfAANPU67W40AaaGZ3UAfmw+1MYyo4QuAZGKzaP2ukbdCD/DYnqi tJy88XqWtyb4UQWKNoQqGKzlYXdKsldYqrLHGoMvj1UN9XcRtXHST/IaLn72o7j7/h/Ac5EL 8lSUVIG4TYn59NyxxAXa07Wi6zjVL1U11fTnFmE29ALYQEXKBI3KUO1A3p4sQWzU7uRmbuxn naUmm8RbpMcOfa9JjlXCLmQ5IP7Rr5tYZUCkZz08LIfF8UMXwH7OOEX87Y++EkAB+pzKZNNd hwoXulTAgjSy+OiaLtuCys9VdXLZ3Zy314azaCU3BoWgaMV0eAW/+gprWMXQM1lrlzvwlD/k whyy9wGf0AEPpLssLVt9VVxNjo6BIkt6d1pMg6mHsUEVzsFNBFVDXDQBEADNkrQYSREUL4D3 Gws46JEoZ9HEQOKtkrwjrzlw/tCmqVzERRPvz2Xg8n7+HRCrgqnodIYoUh5WsU84N03KlLue MNsWLJBvBaubYN4JuJIdRr4dS4oyF1/fQAQPHh8Thpiz0SAZFx6iWKB7Qrz3OrGCjTPcW6ei OMheesVS5hxietSmlin+SilmIAPZHx7n242u6kdHOh+/SyLImKn/dh9RzatVpUKbv34eP1wA GldWsRxbf3WP9pFNObSzI/Bo3kA89Xx2rO2roC+Gq4LeHvo7ptzcLcrqaHUAcZ3CgFG88CnA 6z6lBZn0WyewEcPOPdcUB2Q7D/NiUY+HDiV99rAYPJztjeTrBSTnHeSBPb+qn5ZZGQwIdUW9 YegxWKvXXHTwB5eMzo/RB6vffwqcnHDoe0q7VgzRRZJwpi6aMIXLfeWZ5Wrwaw2zldFuO4Dt 91pFzBSOIpeMtfgb/Pfe/a1WJ/GgaIRIBE+NUqckM+3zJHGmVPqJP/h2Iwv6nw8U+7Yyl6gU BLHFTg2hYnLFJI4Xjg+AX1hHFVKmvl3VBHIsBv0oDcsQWXqY+NaFahT0lRPjYtrTa1v3tem/ JoFzZ4B0p27K+qQCF2R96hVvuEyjzBmdq2esyE6zIqftdo4MOJho8uctOiWbwNNq2U9pPWmu 4vXVFBYIGmpyNPYzRm0QPwARAQABwsF8BBgBCgAmAhsMFiEEm9B+DgxR+NWWd7dUG5NDfTtB YpsFAmgXUF8FCRaWWyoACgkQG5NDfTtBYptO0w//dlXJs5/42hAXKsk+PDg3wyEFb4NpyA1v qmx7SfAzk9Hf6lWwU1O6AbqNMbh6PjEwadKUk1m04S7EjdQLsj/MBSgoQtCT3MDmWUUtHZd5 RYIPnPq3WVB47GtuO6/u375tsxhtf7vt95QSYJwCB+ZUgo4T+FV4hquZ4AsRkbgavtIzQisg Dgv76tnEv3YHV8Jn9mi/Bu0FURF+5kpdMfgo1sq6RXNQ//TVf8yFgRtTUdXxW/qHjlYURrm2 H4kutobVEIxiyu6m05q3e9eZB/TaMMNVORx+1kM3j7f0rwtEYUFzY1ygQfpcMDPl7pRYoJjB dSsm0ZuzDaCwaxg2t8hqQJBzJCezTOIkjHUsWAK+tEbU4Z4SnNpCyM3fBqsgYdJxjyC/tWVT AQ18NRLtPw7tK1rdcwCl0GFQHwSwk5pDpz1NH40e6lU+NcXSeiqkDDRkHlftKPV/dV+lQXiu jWt87ecuHlpL3uuQ0ZZNWqHgZoQLXoqC2ZV5KrtKWb/jyiFX/sxSrodALf0zf+tfHv0FZWT2 zHjUqd0t4njD/UOsuIMOQn4Ig0SdivYPfZukb5cdasKJukG1NOpbW7yRNivaCnfZz6dTawXw XRIV/KDsHQiyVxKvN73bThKhONkcX2LWuD928tAR6XMM2G5ovxLe09vuOzzfTWQDsm++9UKF a/A= In-Reply-To: <20260516132407.GA163589@killaraus.ideasonboard.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 16/05/2026 15:24, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 02:29:15PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 16/05/2026 14:23, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>> On 5/16/26 05:16, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 16/05/2026 14:11, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>>>> On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 10:05:02AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>>> What the hell is that: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260515190707.033BDC2BCB0@smtp.kernel.org/ >>>>>> >>>>>> As a bot you CANNOT MAKE a Reviewer's statement of oversight. You are >>>>>> not a damn human do be able to make such statement. You are a bot, a tool. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Where exactly do the rules say that ? I seem to miss that. >>>>> >>>>> There is a policy document about _contributions_ made by AI, but I don't >>>>> see the one that says that AI agents must not provide Reviewed-by: tags. >>>> >>>> Quotes from the existing policy: >>>> >>>> 1. "By offering my Reviewed-by: tag, I state that:" >>>> >>>> Tool cannot use first person "I". Tool cannot "state that". >>>> >>>> 2. "A Reviewed-by tag is *a statement of opinion* that the patch is an >>>> appropriate modification of the kernel without any remaining serious" >>>> >>>> Tool cannot make a statement of opinion. >>>> >>>> 3. "Any interested reviewer (who has done the work) can offer a >>>> Reviewed-by". >>>> >>>> Tool is not a reviewer as a person, thus above does not grant the tool >>>> permission to offer a tag. >>> >>> I'd like to see that explicitly spelled out. Until then it is your opinion. >> >> It is not an opinion. It is written. I gave you quotes. >> >> Do you want to spell the rules of English language? That tool is not a >> person? >> >> Shall I send the patch like: >> >> Any interested reviewer (who has done the work) can offer a >> Reviewed-by. >> +In English "reviewer" is a person [1]. >> + [1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/reviewer >> >> Seriously, you expect to document the English language? >> >>>>>> Stop faking tags. >>>>>> >>>>>> And really, considering how many false positives Sashiko produces, how >>>>>> poor review comments it gives, how many misleading comments, it's >>>>>> unacceptable to me to consider that a review. >>>>>> >>>>>> Amount of useless noise Sashiko produces already changed my mind how >>>>>> useful that tool is. > > Note this isn't en entirely new situation. As a maintainer, you know how > much you trust each reviewer. You will consider some R-b tags as a sign > you don't even have to look at a patch, and will completely ignore some > others. There's a whole continuum in the middle. In some ways, reviews > by an LLM are similar. You will trust them or not trust them. > > Except they're also very different. > > The kernel needs more skilled reviewers (I don't think this is a > controversial statement). We can't expect all newcomers to start with > extensive experience from day one, so there's a learning curve. I > believe it's fine for more junior reviewers to send R-b tags even if > they miss some issue, as long as they genuinely try and improve (and, in > some unfortunate cases, decide to leave if patch review turns out not to > be for them). Those R-b tags may feel like a bit of noise in the > beginning, but that's compensated by their value increasing over time. Yes, I agree. Reviews from inexperienced people are sometimes fruitless or pointless per actual value they bring, but they allow a person (again: person) to grow in the community with a credits being the reward. > > Bot reviews are not the same. Not only are they generated at a much > larger scale than human reviews, they also won't learn from feedback you > give them. Sure, the tools may be improved when cases of false positives > are identified, and new LLMs may be trained with more (and better ?) > data to improve the output, but they won't learn from the interactions. > > How much value a maintainer sees in those reviews is up to individual > maintainers. I will personally not consider a R-b tag from an LLM to > mean that a patch is ready to be merged (and I believe you won't > either). As such, I think that a R-b from an LLM is misleading and > doesn't provide good value. At best it's free advertising for company > making closed-source tools, which I don't think we should encourage. That's different aspect than I raised. I agree with above approach but it is more subjective. What I brought is object: our docs clearly state that reviewer can offer reviewed-by tag. They do not allow non-reviewers to offer a tag and English is clear on that - only a person is a reviewer. Dog is not a reviewer. Hammer is not a reviewer. Tool is not a reviewer. Guenter did not bring any counter arguments that our docs ALLOW non-person to provide a reviewed-by tag. I brought that arguments as excerpt from our documented policy. Best regards, Krzysztof