From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0015.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD5771A9F96 for ; Thu, 9 Oct 2025 14:30:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=216.40.44.15 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760020226; cv=none; b=r45/3hajRKahEtIvVpcLDi4DEURTkaEOGUDqQ2K84as8S2UQwUzm2Dm4aWO5CSzjlTcIH718gFodfSj95n5kR7tunx91N8a6v6u72qBk1bdGMiJFtutr444xNMhM0AY+zjvncDXloYq0iWBZHDVx3SrU+N6CdNR3okKGq1LtJHk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760020226; c=relaxed/simple; bh=B3/HfuqnShiF1tKS7IF2YGfsx7ra6PMqb//sVx4sGFA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=qQZ33jEF/7dJtnvnzLmEbSIET1POFLzUvkbVSTK+FKe5Y/0CL3krsKefVfsuR0CXcICF+WjHKr8wowvgqY7w0vlhBymUIiR4Q1o1k3mn4IRZKeMvP/2YdxizZCkXNJq9ocSf59nnsNfMYTBF8r+5AGDTrHsS8TlFTgsGH1w7Ogs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=goodmis.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=216.40.44.15 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=goodmis.org Received: from omf19.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B11D65BD1A; Thu, 9 Oct 2025 14:30:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [HIDDEN] (Authenticated sender: rostedt@goodmis.org) by omf19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7E29720030; Thu, 9 Oct 2025 14:30:19 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2025 10:30:19 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Laurent Pinchart Cc: "Bird, Tim" , James Bottomley , Andrew Lunn , Chris Mason , "ksummit@lists.linux.dev" , Dan Carpenter , Alexei Starovoitov , Rob Herring Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS / KERNEL SUMMIT] AI patch review tools Message-ID: <20251009103019.632db002@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20251009091405.GD12674@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> References: <20251008192934.GH16422@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <20251009091405.GD12674@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.20.0git84 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Stat-Signature: 5k8hthxqfush6f1pg4tjy4p3z8pqzfwu X-Rspamd-Server: rspamout07 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 7E29720030 X-Session-Marker: 726F737465647440676F6F646D69732E6F7267 X-Session-ID: U2FsdGVkX1+ngEQEFt3QolS8ZHs1TqGMQx+bGTHSgNA= X-HE-Tag: 1760020219-683237 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX1/4Y9m8jNVGX3vCdFkXKdMARcX8ckjv017DuypVycs5nNIWVZAdqOLVkDuZpXFqWeg0RfBWJyjVzg2CsVH6/r36b4ULfJgwjRpxieJQrMa3BTpswEifxlrNbaHC6ww71aR5EDbKSVFlAXAuDK/9WHK/pWjulEkFHgO3rwCJyLbys64UDaHV3lT7JhDdIWmHOSPMzHcuzWSfMcLtAE7kBJ+40XmCcWwuDKRK5TX4oUpY1MMuNapQo+gMqToDiyyEsVNgGGK29ECKtGXFjZmKLzHyT2BJQh7JftZUR7/q7yKuuc4QnOzuK58LkHue5Mk93QFT2yJ2ep12IOTYeW9fX7hxud2BRfUtC9zTY9qADQU5hm3mT9KpBR4F On Thu, 9 Oct 2025 12:14:05 +0300 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Forcing contributors to pay for access to proprietary tools is not > acceptable. Forcing contributors to even run proprietary tools is not > acceptable. If maintainers want contributions to go through any > proprietary tooling before submission, then this has to run on the > maintainer side (be it on a maintainer's machine, in some form of CI, or > somewhere else). One way I see this working is to attach it to patchwork. Sending a patch to the BPF mailing list has their patchwork trigger a bunch of tests and it will tell you if it passed or failed. I'm assuming if it failed, it doesn't add it to patchwork and the maintainers will ignore it. Attaching AI to patchwork could be useful as well. But this would run on some server that someone will have to pay for. But it will not be the submitter. I've been thinking of adding tests to run when people submit to the tracing mailing list, but I don't want to waste my electricity on it ;-) I have solar now, so perhaps I should. > > You're right that cost would then be a problem. I can certainly imagine > $popular_ai_company sponsoring this short term, until we're > vendor-locked and they stop sponsorship. I don't think rushing in that > direction is a good idea. I don't see lock in being too much of an issue, unless the server that is going to run this adds a lot of scripts that are built on one kind of API that is vendor lock in. If anything, you just lose the service if it becomes too expensive and you can't find an alternative. -- Steve