From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61209C982EE for ; Mon, 21 Sep 2026 20:23:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To: From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=EuIYaACFfYHQrqG9qgcFjCKehJqKFbN314wuAG+MnDA=; b=bpIkR2w1I9rGdj15etkPZ/XjYl y15UoWFsdSEiYEUjKn5vPjWVzCpN/ZRq43Fbrq8MniNrUaaI8dcahVXi9WDXP3LUP3nO+DKPvEtxX YUCvEKX8AOuK1DwZ9nkEiEIA/20MGRNeBcZCtIsQxJw1u1fq5JTqpyLRbw86TMbbGbYOD+vLz4PDo 2Qy9fxk4Ps8LGMUQ4VObXfxaIc4J96t4xugRDnWFdCNx4WEIYScjNBw8CuA8ZN/2U/Y2esKeZIb2s RdGSf+ogdJObm8Pr7a3lpn4J3+hyYK+nQvVnhizMMjHl9ps/qmyKfiLAFoxJ2tfiK/9VXtelU+UEk fgun7gOQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1x8kXu-00000003KkY-49TD; Mon, 21 Sep 2026 20:23:27 +0000 Received: from tor.source.kernel.org ([2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1x8kXt-00000003Kk1-3S2v; Mon, 21 Sep 2026 20:23:25 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7AC960142; Mon, 21 Sep 2026 20:23:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D7A411F000FF; Mon, 21 Sep 2026 20:23:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790022204; bh=EuIYaACFfYHQrqG9qgcFjCKehJqKFbN314wuAG+MnDA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=mkSvno16N/KbJGqH9JJZG3oUqniaYsWHOFiSd9ghPUELNVKurBiKi3yJDjkAbLoRD xGKOhi//72HswvsfOg1UO9UzNxVoOgyxDGA09uczWblOpvKqhNwVzKtE4Nmg7q8Alq oJJdF3xhwK2GNG/oiFS+mklEUQB4Nl9i5O362wvz7KzhGYn4cGHMJqhOvsAUxpmejw dF2Pl8nHmPWHq0/TTbk0nJYkY3n5GTnap8fnt9gJoyy/8oIWJW5OMFDhmOMgDcUm9d 8muczurGCO4jezT8YoOO6RqoACBvBu+HF+ws0+K52hrf/oCE/kEx9EPpGJno1pMcOB 4xz92dZYnAW4Q== Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2026 13:23:23 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: "Wu. JackBB (GSM)" Cc: Loic Poulain , Sergey Ryazanov , Johannes Berg , "Andrew Lunn" , "David S. Miller" , "Eric Dumazet" , Paolo Abeni , Wen-Zhi Huang , Shi-Wei Yeh , "Minano Tseng" , Matthias Brugger , AngeloGioacchino Del Regno , "Simon Horman" , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , "Yu. Robert (GSM)" , "Chang. Jeff (GSM)" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [External Mail] Re: [PATCH v8 1/6] net: wwan: t9xx: Add PCIe core Message-ID: <20260921132323.7e6f76d3@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <690e3d6d04ba47efba2b4cda7b18e42e@compal.com> References: <20260914-t9xx_driver_v1-v8-0-5206c2e6bea0@compal.com> <20260914-t9xx_driver_v1-v8-1-5206c2e6bea0@compal.com> <20260919165434.08d026a8@kernel.org> <690e3d6d04ba47efba2b4cda7b18e42e@compal.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "Linux-mediatek" Errors-To: linux-mediatek-bounces+linux-mediatek=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, 21 Sep 2026 07:06:23 +0000 Wu. JackBB (GSM) wrote: > Two questions on the prompts document. > > Are the following hard requirements the series has to meet, or targets > for the tool? Targets for the LLM but also these are describing a high quality submission in general. > - line 44: "Ideal patches are between 200 and 700 LoC (added + > removed, not counting context)." > - line 46: "Avoid series larger than 2.5k LoC. The first series is > usually larger, but must not exceed 4k LoC." > - lines 57-58: "Series 1 should aim to add the simplest possible > version of the driver which nonetheless can send and receive a > trivial (no offloads) packet." > - line 117: "Avoid the use of managed APIs (``devm_``, ``pcim_``)." > > On the packet one: this series carries no netdev because an earlier > review found the driver too large to submit at once, so the network > functionality was split into follow-up series. That's fine. > The document also asks for no defensive checks (lines 119-120) and few > code comments (line 124). That runs against the direction of the AI review > we have been getting, where both have been growing. Is the current > direction still fine? The kernel coding guide has not changed, defensive checks are still discouraged. If AI is suggesting checks that can't trigger just comment on the review or add a comment / WARN to the code to mark the condition as impossible.