Re: [PATCH RFC] coding-assistants: simplify attribution

[Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>]

On Thu, Jul 02, 2026 at 11:09:37AM +0200, Jori Koolstra wrote:
>
> > Op 02-07-2026 10:44 CEST schreef Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) <vbabka@kernel.org>:
> >
> >
> > On 7/2/26 10:12, Jori Koolstra wrote:
> > > Ah, I still reigniting this discussion again :)
> > >
> > > What about a combination of what David and Jeff say? The whole point
> > > seems to me that the salient information is not that an LLM was used (or
> > > are we going to tag Sashiko as well or any other LLM-based code review
> > > tool?), but what is was used to do. This information may be relevant for
> > > how the review is approached. The latter should perhaps only be in the
> > > cover letter and then we can drop the assisted-by tags altogether.
> > >
> > > The question about enforcement remains.
> >
> > It's not possible to enforce it. People can deny it if the tag is missing
> > and you confront them and even though the submission has many signs of being
> > obviously LLM, there is no definite proof. We've seen (likely, as there's no
> > proof!) that happen in mm.
> >
>
> Maintainers should be free to ignore what they perceive as slop without needing
> to defend that call. Reputation can be gained by submitting useful work or
> being present in the community, attending conferences, giving talks, etc.
> I am not saying that we should be harsh on beginning contributors (or I would
> have to count myself out as well), but they should be as free as possible to
> only invest their time in the project and people that may become involved in the
> community. And that call is up to them.

Yup agreed, however I have had the experience of doing exactly this and then
being second-guessed enormously, which was exhausting honestly.

So we need total clarity that it's OK to do this.

I guess this is partly a subsystem-by-subsystem thing though.

>
> I try to review fix-up patches of first-time contributors, but if it reeks of
> AI I don't bother. We have the same policy in the kernel mentorship program,
> we invest time to help people get involved with the community and kernel, not
> to let someone strike "kernel contributor" of their list. The whole point is
> not that most of this clean-up work is super useful (and indeed an LLM can do it),
> but to let someone feel excited about contributing and maybe getting them to
> to stick around.

Yup agreed :)

>
> > Such situation then penalizes those who disclose so obviously they won't. We
> > should drop the tag and instead think how we can empower maintainers to be
> > able to use their own judgment and deprioritize dealing with what they
> > perceive as LLM slop, without fearing consequences of not being properly
> > responsible etc, and not rely on any non-enforceable tags for that.

Thanks, Lorenzo