From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com (perceval.ideasonboard.com [213.167.242.64]) (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 629102D7BF; Mon, 6 Apr 2026 21:07:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775509630; cv=none; b=Ul6R+mpBHIYWBbF+1WnQp/3O/eUy+tBEPEXT/HU9BzfShowF6Vz3s5kyvRBDExjvQ0bUh4CFo6gldDfBfjY7rbRuS5OG2Xh5ObehHB16QeNpgjJfRp5dPae7X3HPVTsps9Bsu+TDqirfT/4wgZv/d4VGnyZGar61CS4OevV4DLg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775509630; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1LOfMHXAr/3VoSQrFTWUhUhKZV2VaoER/vYpoa0XP0I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=eywbwrYwBbbuWkNgU8LPF+8nDzypXflUPznfo4RS/vECs+89fPbFEfxu/4fy/VKV+GCsfRKTPBinkUqN5btkBE0PYnPinMitHV8iYM2z1nMRq+Mmt6MNRJ9VSjIkno3dOZP5//ovtqGiw18nW5BgBz5dpaZoGERLvLCIQlQ8luI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b=PHwJHf9e; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b="PHwJHf9e" Received: from killaraus.ideasonboard.com (2001-14ba-703d-e500--2a1.rev.dnainternet.fi [IPv6:2001:14ba:703d:e500::2a1]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPSA id DF513143F; Mon, 6 Apr 2026 23:05:32 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1775509533; bh=1LOfMHXAr/3VoSQrFTWUhUhKZV2VaoER/vYpoa0XP0I=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=PHwJHf9eaBqF0JQPh+ng+LOsd6OrJW9PeBsdhY3K7cVhiU2sfzphJxwtKXzmdosyK phr84tEWXSqYHDuxsNazBpARTpABGzraGcBDW55sRVfZWlNJXDyU8ENxYQuPmm7UNx IvpGfLzo6EjfB6B2jUBX5wjo9I7QEb3/lTEa0FvE= Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2026 00:06:57 +0300 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Nicolai Buchwitz Cc: Fernando Fernandez Mancera , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , netdev@vger.kernel.org, workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mbloch@nvidia.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] docs: netdev: document AI-assisted review tooling Message-ID: <20260406210657.GD1268443@killaraus.ideasonboard.com> References: <20260406-nb-docs-ai-review-v1-1-b58943762ca9@tipi-net.de> <345722f0-21b1-4970-8c45-ef85edf9d45b@suse.de> <56c5bdfe2e37738e47b3b4d22e21697c@tipi-net.de> 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=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56c5bdfe2e37738e47b3b4d22e21697c@tipi-net.de> On Mon, Apr 06, 2026 at 10:24:14PM +0200, Nicolai Buchwitz wrote: > On 6.4.2026 21:58, Fernando Fernandez Mancera wrote: > > [...] > > > > > Hi Nicolai, > > maybe I am missing something but [2] isn't from sashiko.dev but from > > netdev AI CI instead. See: > > https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/ai-review.html?id=0b114a22-9aab-4265-8bfc-ea1b5bca5514 > > You're right, I mixed up the two systems - the example I linked was > from the netdev AI bot, not Sashiko. My mistake on the link. > > I stumbled over Sashiko when I noticed the name appearing more often > in other reviews and then found Jonathan's LWN article about it [1]. > > Both tools are actively reviewing patches on the list today. I think > it makes sense to document both rather than just one: > > The netdev AI bot at netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev > Sashiko at sashiko.dev, which posts reviews publicly on its website > Both use the same review prompts by Chris Mason [2], so there is > common ground - though results will vary between them due to the > different AI models (Claude Opus for netdev-ai, Gemini for Sashiko) > on top of the usual AI uncertainty. > > I think it would be useful to document that AI reviews are happening > but mixing AI bots might confuse people. > > Agreed, I'll rework the patch to distinguish the two systems once > the discussion has been settled. > > > The documentation mentioned for running the AI locally is correctly > > related to netdev AI bot. > > > > I think it would be useful to document that AI reviews are happening > > but mixing AI bots might confuse people. > > > >> Check for findings on your submissions and address > >> +valid ones before a maintainer has to relay the same questions. > >> + > > > > I wonder what would be the consequences for this. If less experienced > > submitters are expected to address issues pointed out by AI bots they > > might work on something that isn't valid. AFAIU, the AI output is only > > forwarded to the submitter after a maintainer reviewed it and believes > > it makes sense. > > Fair point. The wording should make clear that the local tooling is > an optional aid, not an obligation. I'll soften the language around > addressing findings. > > Would appreciate input on how much detail is appropriate here - > should the doc just acknowledge that AI review exists and point to > the tooling, or go into more detail about the workflow? In general, if a workflow is expected by a subsystem, it should be documented. I don't see much to be gained from not telling submitters what they're expecting to do. More precisely in this case, as a submitter, I would take it pretty badly if I was told to act on the output of a tool that is prone to hallucinations without a maintainer first triaging the comments. > [1] https://lwn.net/Articles/1063292/ > [2] https://github.com/masoncl/review-prompts/blob/main/kernel/subsystem/networking.md > > >> +You can also run AI reviews locally before submitting. Instructions > >> +and tooling are available at: > >> + > >> + https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/ai-local.html > >> + > >> Testimonials / feedback > >> ----------------------- > >> > > Thanks for your input > > Nicolai -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart