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 7D13E399003; Sun, 18 Oct 2026 11:47:02 +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=1792324023; cv=none; b=lDmPKXxrPVLoOgMsUPRQM8JItBUFlGHGcSsGCVDGmFR6N7Vg39NCaQTVBy/HwnexmOGJ8LCMfv5vL7tbNrcR4eM3xSdBVEjfPO1AC69nFE75uK7fpM/vriIuCOw3y9Syl0wCGNOzXbeWlEAhiEeMEf5AD2pPNipd/NcLiPkDzWw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792324023; c=relaxed/simple; bh=HhGaz2DA1c7Zw4ML0+jpgxu1sJUYRFt9I0HLC5IzF78=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=QaNKwY/6Dy9s3Pf6sMoKN+kYbZyY5+LC8G/IP57wXLP9vU8rQz3SGyWLssU88631th1zu6GoVWGgCTXiY6j0Ox0c1vaFbpmWfHdEfQoj8XAUzi+WH+3+V7FkXJtG3JgFn7v9AwRkvylIaPIfDqq3QYoROuTRMw2eZsFOF2oSNRA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=WLsL7zgZ; 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="WLsL7zgZ" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BB05A1F000C4; Sun, 18 Oct 2026 11:47:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1792324022; bh=02P0Qfkgr7iO52R5gdGJOFDDLsYNq+/QELLUiVu/g/0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=WLsL7zgZzvniYFD4sPxXSB2k4pE163w6HorwKa4kED6bSJcW/8ItNSsE5KrTWvw09 T/j4gP2Y7kcTOwJT58RjNFwIvbxIYLRNEtguaYjNRyAoqvYvoDmXBKkkH73fvmUe+O nW3EWUph9iL3lzuxHACrjrfpmhE3t5UBGbd5a5lfEPxnmL7OahoowIaYh3+mfRrTMA Pa9dK+F3PA9obE7Lp5G/7EN5l6lZ8rtCUsDeMdXpaabIk9AcvlJ00WGsBP+yCJuZzv oQXHzw4//huKsMjLteXE7cuQax840ZIAieg6NciLHs9LnYqHntjytc15VYQD+HBYhV xo/QclFZu9xeQ== Received: by traversing.sirena.org.uk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BF4361C286E6; Sun, 18 Oct 2026 12:46:47 +0100 (BST) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2026 12:46:47 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Alexei Starovoitov Cc: Jiri Kosina , ksummit@lists.linux.dev, sashiko@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: Patch pre-submission to Sashiko Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="kKplnKzNgOh2UpZt" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Cookie: Whoever dies with the most toys wins. --kKplnKzNgOh2UpZt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Oct 17, 2026 at 06:20:47PM +0000, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Sat Oct 17, 2026 at 5:28 PM UTC, Jiri Kosina wrote: > > Neither myself nor anyone else did comment with any review feedback,=20 > > except for Sashiko. Which I believe is what triggered all the immediate= =20 > > resubmissions. > > I don't think this is sustanable. > I think it's just fine. I encourage developers to keep the spam going. > You can simulate github style squah of v1->v2->v3 in your inbox. > Ask your agent to monitor inbox, archive vN when vN+1 arrives > and summarize v1->vN discussion. Then you'll always have the latest > patch set to look at and a summary of what happened when you were away. > Then sit on it for a day or a week to see whether respin > cycle has ended (and bots stopped talking to each other) and then > do a human part of maintainership. It's not just LLM users getting caught by this, I've seen people I know going multiple rounds in what appears to be a very human fashion trying to shut the warnings up. Given that some maintainers won't look at anything until all Sashiko is happy it's a totally reasonable thing to do but I can't imagine it's an inspiring experience. A lot of that has been with valid but not interesting or useful issues (the stereotypical example is something like missing return value checks on a MMIO regmap). Even with people who appear to be LLM users I've seen people going all weekend with no human review only to find that the first human review is that the approach is completely wrong and they were wasting their time fixing the detail issues that were being flagged which I can't imagine is especially pleasant. --kKplnKzNgOh2UpZt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYKAB0WIQReagvpf3TrrA7BoYYv73Ows9A4iQUCatSxogAKCRAv73Ows9A4 iRscAP4koBG0A/J/5sQvGlR5XfiXNu/xeVJkdMyWWAGhcBbKfAEAlK+g9nMjKI8o WCPmP/TT6jHSRWbmgKoK2z/0m0eYcAs= =uLum -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --kKplnKzNgOh2UpZt--