From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
Nicolai Buchwitz <nb@tipi-net.de>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com,
pabeni@redhat.com, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, horms@kernel.org,
corbet@lwn.net, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, rdunlap@infradead.org,
workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] docs: netdev: try to force agents to disclose info for fixes
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2026 10:08:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261030100837.0f4e7d3d@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261030164758.GD2673734@killaraus.ideasonboard.com>
On Fri, 30 Oct 2026 18:47:58 +0200 Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2026 at 09:34:18AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Oct 2026 11:58:17 +0100 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > That's already in the existing text?
> >
> > > Which is true for anyone, not limited to bots...
> > >
> > > Do we really need "different" guidelines for humans and bots?
> >
> > Looks like at least a half of the commit messages today are
> > bot-written. With the existing guidance the bots don't add
> > the requested info by default (presumably since they don't
> > know the information). If this patch doesn't help we may
> > need to add our requirement to coding-agents guide.
> > They seem to be reading that one fairly reliably.
>
> Is there no way this can be tested without being merged upstream ?
Of course it was. But I can only "test" something trivial like asking
Claude to do X. I can't tell whether the random free-model-using
or completely hands off bot will pay attention.
> Tweaking documentation in semi-random ways in the hope that some of the
> changes will have an impact doesn't seem to be a good process,
> especially if it's to work around defect of tools.
>
> And unless I missed something, I thought there was a general consensus
> that documentation should be written in a way that doesn't reference
> agents specifically, as the same behaviour is expected for all
> submissions regardless of how they're generated. Has that changed ?
We're talking about a patch to maintainers-netdev. Let me experiment,
please.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-30 17:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-29 15:34 [PATCH net] docs: netdev: try to force agents to disclose info for fixes Jakub Kicinski
2026-10-29 18:50 ` Nicolai Buchwitz
2026-10-30 10:58 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2026-10-30 16:34 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-10-30 16:47 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-10-30 17:08 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2026-10-30 19:58 ` Andrew Lunn
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=20261030100837.0f4e7d3d@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nb@tipi-net.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=workflows@vger.kernel.org \
/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