From: Konstantin Ryabitsev <mricon@kernel.org>
To: Luka Gejak <luka.gejak@linux.dev>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
omer.e.idrissi@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-staging@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] rtw_sdio_if1_init cleanup and small logic tweak
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2026 10:35:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260401-icy-fine-flamingo-d406ee@lemur> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5252F4DA-4FB2-4217-B13E-4B6AF912220B@linux.dev>
On Wed, Apr 01, 2026 at 11:46:59AM +0200, Luka Gejak wrote:
> You're right, I used a tool to help format the response because
> English is not my native language and I wanted the review to be clear.
> I see now that it made the response look like a bot report and I
> apologize for that. I'll stick to writing reviews manually going
> forward. However the technical issues I pointed out (like the inverted
> _SUCCESS/_FAIL logic in the staging headers and the uninitialized
> pnetdev pointer) are real regressions I found while auditing the code
> on my local tree. I'll make sure future feedback is direct and clearly
> identified if I use any tooling.
If you want to try something out, there is a new feature in b4 that allows
integrating agent reviews in your response in a format that would be better
received by kernel developers:
https://b4.docs.kernel.org/en/latest/reviewer/getting-started.html
HOWEVER, it does not remove the need to verify what the agent wrote -- LLMs
are *routinely* wrong.
Review and include only those comments that you have verified and are sure
about -- never anything that "looks valid," because you are likely to just
waste everyone's time. If you aren't absolutely sure that the agent's findings
are correct, do not include them, no matter the temptation.
Best regards,
--
KR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-01 14:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-31 20:25 [PATCH 0/5] rtw_sdio_if1_init cleanup and small logic tweak Luka Gejak
2026-04-01 8:29 ` Greg KH
2026-04-01 9:46 ` Luka Gejak
2026-04-01 14:35 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev [this message]
2026-04-01 8:40 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-04-01 10:19 Luka Gejak
2026-04-01 10:17 Luka Gejak
2026-04-01 10:29 ` Greg KH
2026-04-01 10:50 ` Greg KH
2026-04-01 10:58 ` Luka Gejak
2026-04-01 10:56 ` Luka Gejak
2026-04-01 10:33 ` Dan Carpenter
2026-03-31 15:32 Omer El Idrissi
2026-04-01 1:39 ` Ethan Tidmore
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260401-icy-fine-flamingo-d406ee@lemur \
--to=mricon@kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=luka.gejak@linux.dev \
--cc=omer.e.idrissi@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox