Re: [RFC PATCH 00/20] boot: add OpenWrt boot method and on-demand FIT loading

[Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2282 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 11:46:17AM -0600, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 09:21:14PM +0000, Daniel Golle wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > This RFC series adds a new boot method for OpenWrt's "uImage.FIT with
> > embedded rootfs" firmware model, along with the underlying infrastructure
> > to load FIT images on-demand directly from storage devices without copying
> > them entirely to RAM first.
> [snip]
> > AI tool disclosure
> > ==================
> > 
> > Major parts of this series were developed with assistance from GitHub
> > Copilot (Claude Opus 4.6, Anthropic). The AI was used as a coding
> > partner for scaffolding boilerplate, drafting documentation and commit
> > messages, running checkpatch sweeps, and iterating on review feedback.
> > All architectural decisions, U-Boot subsystem integration, hardware
> > testing, and final review were done by the human author. Every line of
> > code was reviewed and tested on real hardware before inclusion.
> 
> First, I appreciate your honesty and explanation in the disclosure here.
> 
> This topic comes up, and will keep coming up, and as a project we have
> not yet decided on a position. I know that the Linux Kernel has come up
> with:
> https://docs.kernel.org/next/process/generated-content.html
> so far. But I think that:
> https://docs.postmarketos.org/policies-and-processes/development/contributing-and-ai.html
> brings up points that are quite relevant too. Absolutely no one has been
> happy with when gitlab or patchwork were unusable / unreachable (and for
> some people are still unusable) but it's because of all the AI scrapers
> that things were unusable or now have anubis in front of them (blocking
> other humans now).
> 
> With that said, I want to stress the "human is responsible" portion of
> what both links say, and that given where exactly these changes are
> aimed for, extra scrutiny is required. Things like:
> https://cyberplace.social/@GossiTheDog/116080909947754833
> show just how bad they are about introducing security bugs these days.

Following up on this part I suppose, I see in CI you're working on v2
but please make sure to follow up with the other outstanding questions
I've asked before posting that. Thanks!

-- 
Tom

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]