From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from phobos.denx.de (phobos.denx.de [85.214.62.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE077CD5BC9 for ; Mon, 25 May 2026 14:22:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 255978469D; Mon, 25 May 2026 16:22:07 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=konsulko.com Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=konsulko.com header.i=@konsulko.com header.b="quXnuG2K"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id DD61B8469D; Mon, 25 May 2026 16:22:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-oo1-xc36.google.com (mail-oo1-xc36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c36]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 987B48460E for ; Mon, 25 May 2026 16:22:03 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=konsulko.com Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=trini@konsulko.com Received: by mail-oo1-xc36.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-69dc2c38f6dso201342eaf.2 for ; Mon, 25 May 2026 07:22:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=konsulko.com; s=google; t=1779718922; x=1780323722; darn=lists.denx.de; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=n/h7AK6qYGlBkmE1yCpxKRX7PaE+ITpuNGSBopomhig=; b=quXnuG2KQ1mJxzzXCanyn9X2aImwFyAeVIOdTah54Y5ABwub07YWzeUsNoTn/qt4sg GLvdWqlImmJ9NfY+IlDtccu7u3B//q36dhGUHuL2soVBYi61yccAM+IWwof1pcl0qt0M vOYkPvPabazCxoCxTQgJj83AYTfULlxUSRFLQ= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1779718922; x=1780323722; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=n/h7AK6qYGlBkmE1yCpxKRX7PaE+ITpuNGSBopomhig=; b=Psd2WdRtXsXlhVf9V7ckrmK+FBUp/XkcxE1kHN+Wtsmah8w+gCBTWw3LSZIzYdZH9S XrsXBfjzxP3XRxn/mUUAYKnOIxeQEDXS1qWv0EfKbp33wtbrxSrCxTEVW719ebeUX2Ta fdegXcPJp//tUw1wzPmNdcizDB5cnPHP2hYa7WI9eeN/+3ANvxfkBhuEOv0uBiVgGXvm 6Hx4c5qLZ5y7ljV88dFPKiSOj93bRZgbUy2qFMTEwQeweSA7Qv42vKTRGAoqW61uMlhL bLGsWf2ctPujh5W760fBt0nsTU85SsdYZHJVinPdvJ2mvCNkTGu4uZ0Mn1r3HJBRiogs POIA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywcr4vImswMYCrL1p7sxkIVKw8cSa6c2dWovDkcX1/p85N1Sob4 u2YnAvcJS3jcFY+DClBiu/H+V3io0BSidXkwIHA+ejIbxUo/dYlqKbRgFGkhWawySss= X-Gm-Gg: Acq92OHfao+F76BBsftkT89XmkYnt6RBvbUHUG3OPG2+x9o8oHjET/Gjbp6qG8hOhc2 5M1vI19UENahu4piqCV73RzcnIKrGW2FoipxApmu5G/bNvwlLllBIKeXpIoACtpKvK5q3FSH/pd g1VYNqi1DKFzZcR9cSwZuAi/zWdx9VuyA32kSIJbgvakp6PWqQLjL1Kc0ibOiOy5WkxntYb9oJW m9CcAFCdmd+uoTorYx/4Lu/KhJ5k36iAVRvlmnZnkZGbJVgVVgyp0T5Y0q0a9JKktIfVIcRLKe5 SiI2krwuX7ZOuKaMIghRA0GDQJEqpPfc0RNh42ZmtiYSRWJF0AjjLx32Pw+bnxzncHUwkwAmmNA hgwE0oVf6td1CJt9Us+pG/Ug56LxGOT06zuO1UmwCO9geCf5vCfGzAOKLqtRpG824rq2U8goEiT dRiD1kUv1pNHMhsH2p9QqzMVMEigq+T/OSsx2Ve1CW2ZI2WN5fc484DZhSRZ2kPPnTPlENNXlln caFKaJMDmXKqPvuGTaLDK5Bws9hYK+3/QtT/kNN2d9EWQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6820:2210:b0:696:178e:695b with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-69d7ecd5395mr7606733eaf.44.1779718922211; Mon, 25 May 2026 07:22:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bill-the-cat (fixed-187-191-8-235.totalplay.net. [187.191.8.235]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 006d021491bc7-69d8c3284c0sm4539331eaf.12.2026.05.25.07.22.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 25 May 2026 07:22:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 25 May 2026 08:21:59 -0600 From: Tom Rini To: Josh Law Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de, Simon Glass , Michal Simek Subject: Re: AI-assisted review Message-ID: <20260525142159.GI1858239@bill-the-cat> References: <20260515220758.GM1858239@bill-the-cat> <46705f94-6cef-4016-ab05-7839514e9257@amd.com> <20260518155842.GR1858239@bill-the-cat> <73C33414-3094-4A9D-B823-72DDAFA6DEA0@disroot.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0sOckEfpim1bodaE" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <73C33414-3094-4A9D-B823-72DDAFA6DEA0@disroot.org> X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Sender: "U-Boot" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.8 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean --0sOckEfpim1bodaE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, May 25, 2026 at 03:11:49PM +0100, Josh Law wrote: > On May 25, 2026 3:03:28 PM GMT+01:00, Simon Glass wrot= e: > >Hi Tom, > > > >On Mon, 18 May 2026 at 09:58, Tom Rini wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 10:55:40AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > On 5/16/26 00:07, Tom Rini wrote: > >> > > On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 03:03:21PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Hi, > >> > > > > >> > > > There was a query on the call this week about whether I am doing > >> > > > AI-assisted code review. As I said on the call: yes. Here is a > >brief > >> > > > description of how it works. > >> > > > > >> > > > It is built into Patman (on the Concept tree) with a new 'patman > >> > > > review' command. You give it the series name / number, or perhaps > >a > >> > > > patch name/number and it applies the patches to a new branch, do= es > >a > >> > > > review then adds its comments to its database. > >> > > > > >> > > > A '-d' flag can be used to create draft emails in Gmail (sorry, = it > >> > > > doesn't support other email programs yet). You then check and > >update > >> > > > the emails and send them (or delete them). I am not an expert in > >> > > > handling the 'user voice' part of AI, but have made an attempt to > >make > >> > > > it follow any provided configuration, as well as to scan recent > >> > > > reviews to actually create to create a voice. > >> > > > > >> > > > Obviously this is very rudimentary and could be expanded > >considerably. > >> > > > But the mere fact that it creates draft emails is a win for me, > >even > >> > > > if I ultimately delete or rewrite most of the comments. I can > >imagine > >> > > > 10 different ways to improve it to be more useful. > >> > > > > >> > > > I wrote a blog post about it if you want more details, or you can > >ask me here. > >> > > > > >> > > > I am very interested in hearing how others are using these new > >tools > >> > > > for code review. > >> > > > >> > > And the big thing for now is that since we as a project do not yet > >have > >> > > an AI policy aside from "please don't". One of the points I was > >making > >> > > on the call is that there's a difference in value between "Human > >> > > reviewed it, looks fine" and "Human spent some tokens, agent didn't > >see > >> > > any problems". > >> > > > >> > > And I know several other people have been doing at least first pass > >> > > reviews with various agent-tools, it's just no one else has been > >posting > >> > > reviews at your scale. And lessons learned from other projects is > >that > >> > > the prompts are more important than whatever wrapper around the > >agent > >> > > one is using. > >> > > > >> > > >> > Don't think scale is the problem. Tool and integration is another > >topic. > >> > >> Simon posted approximately 100 reviews in about 24 hours. That scale is > >> a problem, when most of them are just reviewed-by tags, from someone > >> that has a history of doing human reviews. Reputation is a factor here > >> I'm trying to figure out how best to articulate. > >> > >> I have thoughts on the rest that I want to get back to later, thanks. > > > >I should point out that I tend to do reviews locally bit by bit and > >then recheck and send out in batches later, particularly when I need > >to dig into the code and check things. I suspect a lot of the > >'reviewed-by' ones are on revised series where I already reviewed v1, > >etc. For better or worse, patman tends to have something to say on > >most patches (too picky for my style so I often delete comments). > > > >Re the AI policy, I suggest adding it in the project docs (even if it > >is very brief), rather than referencing a URL from another project. > > > >Regards, > >Simon > > >=20 > Hey guys, sorry for the unexpected email but I have a question >=20 > How would you know the reviewed by tag wasn't just made by a AI >=20 > Would like: "Here is the tag from soandso AI" >=20 > Or would it be like >=20 > "AI reviewed this and it looks fine" >=20 > Apologies for the unexpectedness of the email :) That's one of my concerns, yes. And I've been a bit shocked that other, bigger, projects that do allow for AI review haven't come up with something already. --=20 Tom --0sOckEfpim1bodaE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYKAB0WIQTzzqh0PWDgGS+bTHor4qD1Cr/kCgUCahRbBwAKCRAr4qD1Cr/k Ci5QAQDWnf43IwA/K76vOqHYHtJPi+ghSCqr+4Z00LOsLJEKPAEArMEDkP2AKlt3 zR9o4CfOlk24YYEeK8HkCxq+5S9iVAU= =Sqyc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0sOckEfpim1bodaE--