Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Annotating patches containing AI-assisted code

[Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>]

On 06/08/2025 11:13, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2025 at 11:17:23AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> 
>> Just a "Patch generated with AI" under the --- cut off line would be
>> fine.
> 
>> We had a patch in staging from AI which "copy and pasted" from a spec
>> that it had hallucinated.  The language in the commit message is so
>> smooth and confident that it took a re-read to see that it's totally
>> nonsense.  A lot of the patches in staging are from newbies and
>> sometimes kids and I believe the person who sent the  AI assisted
>> patch did it with good intentions.  But, ugh, I don't want to deal
>> with that.
> 
> I think the suggestion from an earlier thread that people should say
> what the AI they were using (as they tend to for static checkers and
> so on) was good - that's useful for both noticing tools that work well
> and tracking things down if we notice a pattern of errors with some
> tool.

Also, if AI is used, then how was it used? Keeping the inputs may also
be useful ?

-- 
Ben Dooks				http://www.codethink.co.uk/
Senior Engineer				Codethink - Providing Genius

https://www.codethink.co.uk/privacy.html