From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 ED21430E858; Tue, 7 Jul 2026 18:16:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783448190; cv=none; b=Ub/Xm/j7bUCrjNFaa6FGRw4T2njZs5Fkwuny3wQh0juquPcE8n4DPLaqLX6KhFXInwLHGCZEQxqADcqb8RYpqcLCClArSOI/es5vVmQAMwzj3enaUoTQjpZiKPWz8BFNHARxMTnvYHu6iLSJBzJ37QBnJ8YdIAPViGSBVwDUaPw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783448190; c=relaxed/simple; bh=tBsoGsWVTB1fKQ6KeMMeSEfbcngCCs8AaTyTeTMK7AE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=rUbdeCuvbKyDJspxNR2o/1xafKEia23Kfevke8jMixDbS8mr1sn3ASXCAqhGPszr3tMW9hxc0Kq6lPoLP3zz5ZJSTq01sMEV/C+d+BzMFjQqq4sla40HSS2pb0VnAYJKVFAbuhqXl8ebxGzcdTjPA5lT/fizTA4ganIZuXxn4e4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=aX/Y2Ep0; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="aX/Y2Ep0" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 274A01F000E9; Tue, 7 Jul 2026 18:16:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1783448188; bh=XmepRTPWwRnVbUnZzeTYEcNXbXDzNGQFuUqYXSOcfCA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=aX/Y2Ep0+l8exoXDFJNq3CoNTjW358ElKQjFxPr5x+ySYh5/KK0vVo23Q/5jzJkwH AkZ+dslz3IGAgAax2AOti9AJlD9fQoUOXFuFhHE//U6FdRchMlvmRwAZ4OCxQDNtEo VIXBj8mgDgv9562Nf8GHtBmkJJ4eE+9lsMOLBILmwnH7jlyH7qY8SzQ5W4H4VUm3rX zXZSo57p0K/Hilgk14FsH7N7NH7++5UNddadLjwejlNthgqPTt91cgLRkiOMNm6W+g 7kLbCcSku2S53mZVS1YV+0Bsz5z35O6ocDvQgqvMJggMfexUelXRMTm+geEfE0c7Tb zz7MK8ldtiiUg== Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2026 19:16:15 +0100 From: Lorenzo Stoakes To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" , Laurent Pinchart , Boris Burkov , Jeff Layton , Greg KH , Linus Torvalds , Jonathan Corbet , Justin Stitt , Carlos Maiolino , Jakub Kicinski , Jori Koolstra , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Brian Foster , Christoph Hellwig , David Disseldorp , Mark Brown , Jani Nikula , Jens Axboe , Vlastimil Babka , "Christian Brauner (Amutable)" , workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: remove the requirement for LLM attribution Message-ID: References: <3f447113-4407-471f-878f-e6d6edafee71@kernel.org> <20260703163251.GB3734786@killaraus.ideasonboard.com> <0ba6bf66-e48f-40df-a953-503d317b3dbe@kernel.org> <5ccbb28a-171e-40c1-9a6b-9ac7b6b7777d@kernel.org> <20260707171039.GD9368@frogsfrogsfrogs> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260707171039.GD9368@frogsfrogsfrogs> On Tue, Jul 07, 2026 at 10:10:39AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, Jul 07, 2026 at 04:10:07PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 07, 2026 at 03:29:44PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote: > > > On 7/7/26 11:55, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > > > > LGTM! Do you want to send that then? People can comment on the actual path then > > > > (probably worth cc'ing everybody here on that also). > > > > > > Let's first gather some more thoughts on the rough direction before spinning of > > > yet another discussion. :) > > > > I'm suggesting sending a simple, uncontroversial, change to get movement rather > > than continue this never-ending talking shop :) > > Oh but I love shop talk! :P > > My opinions (having been on vacation for most of this thread) are > roughly: > > 1. For patches generated by deterministic tools (e.g. sed/cocinelle), > please include the source code so that anyone reading the patch can > check the reproducibility of that patch. But that can be free-form > in the commit message: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/157343508488.1945685.9867882880040545380.stgit@magnolia/ > > 2. For nondeterministic machine assistance, I like the idea of asking > patch submitters to note which part(s) of the patch had machine > assistance applied. I don't care all that much about the technology > used (e.g. LLM, or Eliza, or whatever). Something like: > > Assisted-by: LLM # commit message > Assisted-by: LLM # finding bugs in the original commit > > I don't care to give free advertising to any specific LLM-pusher, nor > do I care to give the whole *industry* any free publicity. They can > spend their own leveraged money on advertising. > > Mecha-assistance-done-by: finding bugs in the original commit > > or maybe just > > MAD: finding bugs in the original commit > > :P > > 3. I grade *all* the trailers that submitters attach to patches! And > how well they engage me on my weird followup questions! Both help me to > construct a conscientiousness vibe, which is how I decide how much > effort to put into making a response. Do you allege that your patch > fixes a bug but fail to cc stable? Do you post obviously LLM generated > content but leave out an Assisted-by tag? Do you habitually drop off > the list for long periods of time? Decline to run /any/ QA on your > patches at all? Not gonna waste my time. > > OTOH, I also look for *good* behavior: cc'ing stable, responding to > questions with a day or two, kvetching on fstests@ about the horridness > of bash scripts? I find that endearing. ;) > > --D > > > Anyway I'll leave it up to you! > > > > Thanks, Lorenzo > > I love all of this, no notes :) Cheers, Lorenzo