From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.forwardemail.net (smtp.forwardemail.net [121.127.44.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 991AF233943 for ; Tue, 19 May 2026 23:14:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=121.127.44.66 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779232458; cv=none; b=bFMfeEZOrqduajy2h8Vx8spyaSjapGhlhOVt9EjyJOu9L53+t2g+AFvlT9EUQSdzIEu9iaGQ6xpFx5QVH1hBfnuc2/di6l1g6G02v3p/+ai1hY3xPnFEsYFWZct27zIuu+coxKGW6xgfZD3IulSL9nHYT44v2SDAN7w4IAN3sXA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779232458; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OpnXccnP1ozNGUSdnlbBvP1rS6zNyiymHfxwBsbuhWU=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Cc:Subject:From:To: References:In-Reply-To; b=mM4YfEP0BlNDEkxPQdQXHtxQeQ1I8q3tdhgilOLrdrmW9qJlxi6tb0t8EzUKAmrWV7By9BR/a0IufAm9J3VSJLqZTNqiPOa0PCh4cUGbZj1sfhFW+24jyunhEyiFG5h6aU8ErKX6JmcYUx/Fa/DFelADfEO0NAe3A0L67+N895E= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ubuntu.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fe-bounces.ubuntu.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ubuntu.com header.i=@ubuntu.com header.b=sv0JPw1R; arc=none smtp.client-ip=121.127.44.66 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ubuntu.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fe-bounces.ubuntu.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ubuntu.com header.i=@ubuntu.com header.b="sv0JPw1R" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ubuntu.com; h=In-Reply-To: References: To: From: Subject: Cc: Message-Id: Date: Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding: Mime-Version; q=dns/txt; s=fe-953a8a3ca9; t=1779232453; bh=OpnXccnP1ozNGUSdnlbBvP1rS6zNyiymHfxwBsbuhWU=; b=sv0JPw1RqtGIuHxNwlQOZ1kx0OSSXclHlTdrg6h96IrxlivjRsaceNTo7aJELIwLJG5uuRyPC nreP13BXvX+QVKY0afLK9eK1thWdNHIgvwKsLZZs0PfxKzv5VFPq6CMdBc6kJtBwU4GPuhukFfk kOeACgCWqekOVBjEou808n3O9axxdv+EfptEZ4VMqBBY3jFwiXYJsy+vc/zPICuhN/mZ1ybXqJl JLpXpxXT5/RbOoUZw9J60T4Az2fC4pxEiRoT1kYss357HvaH9UwbQKUs9a+Cqn5EpheY+mHIV9I nHVvp3dQzNWdOiZanxepKWqWxFGWSYXYARi3IZx7DaBw== X-Forward-Email-ID: 6a0ceeb7dba98f5f2747cad7 X-Forward-Email-Sender: rfc822; jpeisach@ubuntu.com, smtp.forwardemail.net, 121.127.44.66 X-Forward-Email-Version: 2.8.12 X-Forward-Email-Website: https://forwardemail.net X-Complaints-To: abuse@forwardemail.net X-Report-Abuse: abuse@forwardemail.net X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@forwardemail.net Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=Flowed Date: Tue, 19 May 2026 19:13:58 -0400 Message-Id: Cc: "Alessio Ferri" , , , , , "b43-dev" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] b43: complete N-PHY rev 8 + radio 2057 rev 8 support From: "Joshua Peisach" To: =?utf-8?q?Michael_B=C3=BCsch?= , "Joshua Peisach" X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0 References: <8c0a07d2-9ec9-43d6-bdf7-f625bbb4a38a@mythread.it> <20260519175812.7ce97ba1@barney> <20260519215244.2a0d2b29@barney> In-Reply-To: <20260519215244.2a0d2b29@barney> On Tue May 19, 2026 at 3:52 PM EDT, Michael B=C3=BCsch wrote: > On Tue, 19 May 2026 15:32:44 -0400 > "Joshua Peisach" wrote: > >> On Tue May 19, 2026 at 11:58 AM EDT, Michael B=C3=BCsch wrote: >> > On Mon, 18 May 2026 03:49:33 +0200 >> > Alessio Ferri wrote: >> > >> > In general this looks Ok. >> > From the style I assume that this is AI generated, right? >> > If so, can you tell us a bit more about the inputs used for the AI? >> > What information is this implementation based on? =20 >>=20 >> So... awkward question. > > Why? > >> Wasn't there just a conversation[1] about the >> future development of this module, that was left off at "don't touch it >> unless you're going to thouroughly test this", > > Sure. That's why I ask about the development methods used. > >> and now we are going to have a *LLM* work on this? > > I don't care whether code was generated with an LLM or not. > What matters is the development methods used. Fair enough. And it was tested anyway :) sorry for any perceived arrogance. I would tag Reviewed-by but I don't have a script to check the tables (there probably is somewhere... it's a personal problem - a "skill issue" as I sometimes like to call it). -Josh