Re: LLM disclosure (was: [PATCH v2] vfs: remove the excl argument from the ->create() inode_operation)

Jeff Layton
2025-11-07T23:19:32Z

On Fri, 2025-11-07 at 15:35 -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> NeilBrown <neilb@ownmail.net> writes:
>
> > On Sat, 08 Nov 2025, Jeff Layton wrote:
>
> > > Full disclosure: I did use Claude code to generate the first
> > > approximation of this patch, but I had to fix a number of things that it
> > > missed. I probably could have given it better prompts. In any case, I'm
> > > not sure how to properly attribute this (or if I even need to).
> >
> > My understanding is that if you fully understand (and can defend) the
> > code change with all its motivations and implications as well as if you
> > had written it yourself, then you don't need to attribute whatever fancy
> > text editor or IDE (e.g. Claude) that you used to help produce the
> > patch.
>
> The proposed policy for such things is here, under review right now:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251105231514.3167738-1-dave.hansen@linux.intel.com/
>
> jon

Thanks Jon.

I'm guessing that this would fall under the "menial task"
classification, and therefore doesn't need attribution. This seems
applicable:

+ - Purely mechanical transformations like variable renaming

This is a little different, but it's a similar rote task.
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>