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 5E522CD5BB1 for ; Mon, 25 May 2026 14:27:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A089F84841; Mon, 25 May 2026 16:27:27 +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="haRoybXX"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id 5896D8484F; Mon, 25 May 2026 16:27:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-oi1-x231.google.com (mail-oi1-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::231]) (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 06750846FA for ; Mon, 25 May 2026 16:27:23 +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-oi1-x231.google.com with SMTP id 5614622812f47-4855562f32eso1055408b6e.2 for ; Mon, 25 May 2026 07:27:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=konsulko.com; s=google; t=1779719242; x=1780324042; 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=yDA3yNyFWgNLztIETG0N2KlKv3AYpq77YH3svm2kJKs=; b=haRoybXXCjrs0URfnKTh8lHSWnAUGeXRKpD60oAQG1DHfR4zq76iQfms2kYsdDFIcf gjt95fljvXTHlSpaC1zRJZ6reW+yGC5fdEszmWKoiZnIn7fT8pkeUrFjRUaEAq3QSAM6 JBDnm0OlQ9eNGdAtuJReAhfl9YDGTs6rBsdOA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1779719242; x=1780324042; 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=yDA3yNyFWgNLztIETG0N2KlKv3AYpq77YH3svm2kJKs=; b=D8pDkDgy3rmW8MOdHArldOjVj3b3COLZL6kAIpW3ve6sBj4egqUqSa758JXllRsPV1 xguNNSpKMvd3Wkrk45XExFXhpZC5OjsztBnmQ0eWBQYQsukL/TkEXIoVS5abts/3XWk9 CGdu1tp6EHJAbiMgETAv4mFTdSulB6arhueRMB8PMMeQX+llCxMubm62WlqJA5hU5xya ZrIdRCly0StHm6ijMJWG8xKBl1Uhc22d6Z3bavr+U31L5zxpRRU39+X3MRz7eQzNRxK0 3xdo1X20jh1Oc/agJCdpTiGfX87B1gXzpkrH1rXYclyL9v6D4Yp4R9aPBPclWHoay0+K uCrg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw3v85h1N2iimYgw4eORpZlxRmC94ipYrC0zooICUrPqda67ZXk fO/WuKVC7FTCn/66lvoEc8OE5hf+fYmt/0ED6zaCpZKh/wly8Oy0gfk8sUSoAgwbRFI= X-Gm-Gg: Acq92OHwufNWn9MazeTSR25KQu7zxcbqoX0OwExszY1Rb8HbmPeiLEQgYTHzqQYYAah NPGN7/ZkZVk+xO4LFS8GQ6m1OsC2DnCjt2ohx5KUWWcJtwNKRMPKVWbBd+8ewrmiuCjY1sH4Vg5 cL50tOT9vVIBCYF0H4xh03+lR6AD185MgRJ1oA85C2Zt+pIpO90k+AAUYwcKc2m+tMx39/HEHPJ QiV8AQuEdqVJPuIOIUE1vYlmmx7jaOesxEW2G9yBdv47R7STrz1MRCWoT6z/Nk3ptKnmATZeoS3 VBVHmX5yOo/SeGvzdE2rrNX6DG31AacPRTOIBz8ATxp+OkIIoCdtd0sw61gQ5UQLfp5XzXv9Yzk vQlMBkNYT3gSgHx0iA0YtNd+XSZL1quGlGCGsGgIWRmC+MZrRA/mhdRUvLyk2QZRlASOxBWJmbq 9IelaNNCph71LyCaJ3iuJRaDm1uLOlzGzGBCzjxyrFX00AOWqJ14sL9C2lNqrUbr+rEk5fmsT8F wBWjD0jdDiej4yU3SooxYboKK1TAIn2MWy7u3Sar1MVQw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:5387:b0:485:29ad:d1a9 with SMTP id 5614622812f47-4854a3fc871mr8061928b6e.37.1779719241617; Mon, 25 May 2026 07:27:21 -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 5614622812f47-4855476cbccsm4788370b6e.18.2026.05.25.07.27.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 25 May 2026 07:27:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 25 May 2026 08:27:18 -0600 From: Tom Rini To: Josh Law Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de, Simon Glass , Michal Simek Subject: Re: AI-assisted review Message-ID: <20260525142718.GJ1858239@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> <20260525142159.GI1858239@bill-the-cat> <1B7720FE-03CB-4CA5-A063-2B4A87B633C5@disroot.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="1mnsC3dSn+QBymSb" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1B7720FE-03CB-4CA5-A063-2B4A87B633C5@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 --1mnsC3dSn+QBymSb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, May 25, 2026 at 03:25:19PM +0100, Josh Law wrote: > On May 25, 2026 3:21:59 PM GMT+01:00, Tom Rini wrote: > >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 > >wrote: > >> >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, > >does > >> >a > >> >> > > > review then adds its comments to its database. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > A '-d' flag can be used to create draft emails in Gmail (sorr= y, > >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 rece= nt > >> >> > > > 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 m= e, > >> >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, thank= s. > >> > > >> >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 > Personally Tom, projects like Linux take it slightly different >=20 > maintainers usually say: > "AI asked a question" then link the sashiko (AI review tool) link, with > all of AIs comments >=20 > The general gist, is if there is any comments, you either fix it, or you > say why it isn't a bug >=20 > I have mixed opinions on sashiko tbh. >=20 > Also, maintainers tend to use their **OWN** review tools. >=20 > But most projects do generally ban AI anything. >=20 > Idk what we could do for u-boot when it comes to a sashiko like solution. >=20 > Maybe we could talk about it? Proposing a policy for the project about AI (and indeed not just linking to other projects which have what I find to be helpful references) is on the TODO list for the project leadership committee. We've just been busily handling other issues for a while now, unfortunately. --=20 Tom --1mnsC3dSn+QBymSb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYKAB0WIQTzzqh0PWDgGS+bTHor4qD1Cr/kCgUCahRcRgAKCRAr4qD1Cr/k CqaMAQCl/8ApJdPGyABXCcFaE58eTI6HN+MIkewoq3vZYW+KMQD/YGbHA2WWolOk QtC7djI6WYRe0aNfRi8sws/f1gwNHwE= =HJTm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --1mnsC3dSn+QBymSb--