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 2B22238F252; Tue, 7 Jul 2026 19:03:52 +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=1783451034; cv=none; b=Uzld4q4R9huxnH40FZlXnE4rI7Q18OMFsf1SlBDMhQKIDXliv93HYMOF/pdP3QlUxUFkyGmUIFaPBIJOa09y1V/z7x9gs5lWfp5MsMRA1RU5VYwwBewNJXi07I+gPWn5EXydIQFLJCCJn46cxzCXJu8R5J+KaHmxbZZ/ba1jQEY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783451034; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0VJ6cuRJTTQnnxSz8DchgznATTLiy2kRi3FMEm1nmDY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=tkIBxADkuvKVYZoXUx721+YCgQ6AawOGGCzcGHHg5ssoENyWTmNfjgFHSitIaA1FsT2pbCxEGENRHuqhfenlUAYmVTIESjvklxQJk+Q9Jk1YBWGbir5vk7lhB7b/6bK5LRX1Uo9GqWcMwZwRx7NdMFNR4nFjKxAYIsTml5YMtfs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=VLQKCfWj; 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="VLQKCfWj" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 21CC91F000E9; Tue, 7 Jul 2026 19:03:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1783451032; bh=YyKq/KokqVzrbkpjbywEAWWCk+N/clH4+72CIChvAuM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=VLQKCfWjqAoYWXdnpatWLCxMTS1RBAuuunMGSLnlobAGaJQhMiCJEmU8t3zK83GzM LAdtUOdUrEwp4rXeaP+TGMKEuajRmGJ9xf6n5BTIWLBt1j8omSbuZIiF553DfMe5TG 7+BGzOV4OwLn+UWPrQDhNy9TeE8HNcf5qMze5CucwlD0YfttMaAef6UfxjGgOYpP10 ZsU4jHwcKRVd4dxXLCdkbvs8ighiaZ2Wml8rrC3YIoxP7h8/mJOMdhJOUNrhTkhqee bXkfZgkjOrG2AT5hzFbyUqkHpQ+ZhabVe404evZLo09A4ofb9sbJPDwkwPST6D8/Tm xM44EHLVA67pA== Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2026 20:03:44 +0100 From: Lorenzo Stoakes To: Christian Brauner Cc: Linus Torvalds , Jonathan Corbet , Jens Axboe , David Hildenbrand , Jeff Layton , Vlastimil Babka , workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] coding-assistants: simplify attribution Message-ID: References: <20260701-work-coding-assistants-v1-1-a20a94d1d606@kernel.org> 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: <20260701-work-coding-assistants-v1-1-a20a94d1d606@kernel.org> On Wed, Jul 01, 2026 at 05:54:48PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > I remain very confused by our coding assistant contribution guidelines. > I'm going to be a bit polemic now but this seriously in good faith. > > Why precisely do we require all this detailed information about what > specific coding assistant was used? > > I find it very irritating that our git history has effectively started > to function a bit like a free advertising platform for a bunch of AI > companies and their proprietary agents and models. > > And it reamins unclear to me what exactly we do get out of this detailed > information: Do we want to run statistical analysis on what agent and > model is used the most and publish that on LWN at some point? > > I acknowledge that my stance is even more radical: imho we would just > stop it with any disclosure requirements completely. It's useless imho. > We already see that other than core contributors most people don't care > and will just not disclose their usage of AI. I think this is entirely > pointless and worse it brings in undefined legal status as well. It's > not like recent events of pulling certain models from the face of the > earth have made this any less concerning. > > But fine, if we want to do this can we please just dumb it down to > > Assisted-by: LLM > > or > > Assisted-by: Coding Assistant > > or something else. That still gives the "careful review" signal to > reviewers that want to pay special attention to LLM generated work while > avoiding this slew of metadata. > > Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner (Amutable) FWIW I'm fine with this. We can always send the comment stuff as a follow up. So: Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes Maybe send it non-RFC with a cleaned up commit msg? Feel free to add my tag to that. > --- > Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst | 8 ++------ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst b/Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst > index 899f4459c52d..fe34f3e7e828 100644 > --- a/Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst > +++ b/Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst > @@ -43,12 +43,8 @@ When AI tools contribute to kernel development, proper attribution > helps track the evolving role of AI in the development process. > Contributions should include an Assisted-by tag in the following format:: > > - Assisted-by: AGENT_NAME:MODEL_VERSION [TOOL1] [TOOL2] > + Assisted-by: LLM [TOOL1] [TOOL2] > > -Where: > - > -* ``AGENT_NAME`` is the name of the AI tool or framework > -* ``MODEL_VERSION`` is the specific model version used > * ``[TOOL1] [TOOL2]`` are optional specialized analysis tools used > (e.g., coccinelle, sparse, smatch, clang-tidy) > > @@ -56,4 +52,4 @@ Basic development tools (git, gcc, make, editors) should not be listed. > > Example:: > > - Assisted-by: Claude:claude-3-opus coccinelle sparse > + Assisted-by: LLM coccinelle sparse > > --- > base-commit: dc59e4fea9d83f03bad6bddf3fa2e52491777482 > change-id: 20260701-work-coding-assistants-650ae1202ee0 > Cheers, Lorenzo