All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev, Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, ksummit@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: How to fix problems with the sashiko review model
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 09:40:13 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8CC99AC2-E8E6-4644-A504-454C1FFD30CC@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8cb7a4a8a13bb003daa1d1413517e104955772d3.camel@HansenPartnership.com>

> On Jul 22, 2026, at 8:10 AM, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 2026-07-22 at 06:43 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> [...]
>> For Sashiko, fork and clone
>> https://github.com/sashiko-dev/sashiko.git,
>> submit your changes into the clone, and send a pull request. Or at
>> least that is how I do it.
>> 
>> In the Sashiko source, per-subsystem prompts are located in directory
>> third_party/prompts/kernel/subsystem.
> 
> OK, now I'm confused.  I thought
> 
> https://github.com/masoncl/review-prompts
> 
> was the source of truth for this, but that project seems to have been
> copied into sashiko rather than pulled in as a module.  If you want to
> improve the review prompts do you now have to submit to both (which is
> getting to be a bit wasteful)?

It’s a bit messy now, but Chris and me are working on something more sane.
As of now, Sashiko is using per-subsystem prompts from Chris’s repository
with some changes around more generic prompts. I periodically pull updates
from Chris’s repository. Also several folks sent prompts changes directly to
Sashiko repository, Idk if Chris is merging them back, probably not.

I also experiment with auto-generating prompts based on human feedback
to sashiko reviews, initial results are quite promising.

So as of now, I’d say send a pull request to Chris or me directly, we’ll figure out
a better model going forward.

The hard part is testing: it’s quite easy to confuse a LLM with an unlucky prompt change.
We need a stronger guidance and maybe LLM review for prompts too (sashiko for sashiko?!).
E.g. Sashiko implements a much smaller set of tools (intentionally) than a generic coding agent,
so if a prompt contains something like “run checkpatch.pl” or “search lore for …” it might be
very confusing to the LLM. When I’m pulling significant prompt updates from Chris’s repository,
I run the full benchmark to make sure we don’t get regressions.

Thanks!

  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-07-22 16:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-22  4:12 [PATCH] scsi: mpt3sas: validate variable event array spans Pengpeng Hou
2026-07-22  4:27 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-22 11:58   ` How to fix problems with the sashiko review model James Bottomley
2026-07-22 12:11     ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-07-22 12:42       ` James Bottomley
2026-07-22 13:08     ` Greg KH
2026-07-22 13:10       ` Greg KH
2026-07-22 13:45         ` James Bottomley
2026-07-22 14:08           ` Theodore Tso
2026-07-22 15:29           ` Miguel Ojeda
2026-07-22 13:42       ` James Bottomley
2026-07-22 14:00         ` Johannes Berg
2026-07-22 14:17           ` James Bottomley
2026-07-22 14:25             ` Johannes Berg
2026-07-22 15:39               ` Steven Rostedt
2026-07-22 15:55                 ` James Bottomley
2026-07-22 16:36                   ` Johannes Berg
2026-07-22 15:09             ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2026-07-22 15:24               ` James Bottomley
2026-07-22 20:25                 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2026-07-22 14:20           ` Mark Brown
2026-07-22 13:43       ` Guenter Roeck
2026-07-22 15:10         ` James Bottomley
2026-07-22 15:41           ` Miguel Ojeda
2026-07-22 15:54           ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2026-07-22 16:40           ` Roman Gushchin [this message]
2026-07-22 15:55     ` Roman Gushchin
2026-07-22 11:32 ` [PATCH] scsi: mpt3sas: validate variable event array spans James Bottomley

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=8CC99AC2-E8E6-4644-A504-454C1FFD30CC@linux.dev \
    --to=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
    --cc=clm@fb.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=ksummit@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.