Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] The role of AI and LLMs in the kernel process

[Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>]

On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 06:11:31PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> TBH I'm not thrilled about the general test code is trivial assumption
> either, unstable test code or test code that doesn't cover what people
> think it covers are both problems.  The issues when things go wrong are
> less severe than the kernel itself but things still need to be
> maintained and we already have issues with people being dismissive of
> the selftests.

Yeah I didn't mean to downplay this or suggest it's not important, as you've
(possibly :P) seen I write a lot of it myself and consider it vital.

However the point is that we can:

- Generate scenarios relatively quickly that way.
- Resulatant mistakes are at least _less_ impactful. And you'd hope, would come
  out in the wash more easily.

However, I wonder whether it might be better simply to restrict LLMs to test
data generation or the like.

These are again all exactly the kinds of things that make this an important
topic to discuss I believe :)

Cheers, Lorenzo