From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 93E781EB1AF for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2025 22:52:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754952778; cv=none; b=R4c0qY+dls3TgiNxv2h7Ez+mhmQf5GwjFbqkvkC8N+kb0TDQkfEc3FYJO7lQiStTlanoppTGjwyHYxx9Oxkj+jpgRwtX9feABD+r6Z5PfzSVYYVPQiV9DuZPcPhnif0QmqAVhb3WVdDUoiJC1g99IiWVYSxpphnRgyNtyF8J5pQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754952778; c=relaxed/simple; bh=yazMtvRH+zpN8zBhsA+DO0nZDbDTyZlnL6+f/VPrynI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=D81rg+2GlZaejmTmto4o3taBNsYYBjHMDir3GoVF8evMuTLsXdCF+9sPsDV1mIjcogk/8SUQIhsqK/WS2liy54TC8ShH1MgMjsBBapHkHX8xw9ePSt1A9uAVnQbvFNFebjBZrvxbEUX1hqsySI8ZAnoSJBcRavIYr19WqIRmsF0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=l+gh3NX8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="l+gh3NX8" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E06B3C4CEED; Mon, 11 Aug 2025 22:52:57 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1754952777; bh=yazMtvRH+zpN8zBhsA+DO0nZDbDTyZlnL6+f/VPrynI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=l+gh3NX8/eS6MNLgZN2LKfHeKV57phhorzD5BG+1J7WmMf29U00DFxkGfEJysOtL2 /e4YyAj9Sa6xsrkFbgomezWxnDvKtB7D0VlqF+qeoKJi3owpJvWvO2gN3vGXeScLUO Ml4NtIDxyisp1Y0ueOUXzhNv3MNnsGhqf1Dq7Otipgw3jD3s845htMUQFgjWGvX7Rd ABGCWHYi/dE5Q/w1jiS6rEdcr7oXAUMTnVhI8diwqzpOFR02Jivredjv6LYI4/IW7n 7tGv9DITtYjSFQzwgEQNRZmOz0O/OOi1y2TWJ87ou1Pj653LwalqovdZDA/BNx77yA lM2GsQOtna33Q== Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 906AECE0965; Mon, 11 Aug 2025 15:52:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 15:52:57 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: "Luck, Tony" , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Sasha Levin , Jiri Kosina , ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Annotating patches containing AI-assisted code Message-ID: <5b79d292-7a75-48f4-8303-9ecd5211fe99@paulmck-laptop> Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org References: <1npn33nq-713r-r502-p5op-q627pn5555oo@fhfr.pbz> <12ded49d-daa4-4199-927e-ce844f4cfe67@kernel.org> 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-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 03:45:54PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On August 11, 2025 3:12:25 PM PDT, "Paul E. McKenney" wrote: > >On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 02:57:30PM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 02:46:11PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >> > On Fri, Aug 08, 2025 at 10:31:27AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> > > On 05/08/2025 19:50, Sasha Levin wrote: > >> > > With AI you do not have to even write it. It will hallucinate, create > >> > > some sort of C code and you just send it. No need to compile it even! > >> > > >> > Completely agreed, and furthermore, depending on how that AI was > >> > trained, those using that AI's output might have some difficulty meeting > >> > the requirements of the second portion of clause (a) of Developer's > >> > Certificate of Origin (DCO) 1.1: "I have the right to submit it under > >> > the open source license indicated in the file". > >> > >> Should the rules be: > >> > >> 1) No submissions directly from an AI agent. The From: line must > >> always refer to a human. > >> > >> 2) The human on the From: line takes full responsibilty for the > >> contents of the patch. If it is garbage, or broken in some way > >> there's no fall back on the "but AI wrote that bit". > > > >Another option is "The AI was trained only on input having a compatible > >license." Which, to your point, would to the best of my knowledge cut > >out all of the popular and easily available AIs. > > > >There might well be less restrictive conditions on the AI training data, > >but I am not qualified to evaluate such conditions, let alone construct > >them. > > I think we need legal advice on this, but I think this is a *really* > important issue. It could end up being a very ugly mess otherwise. Indeed, one of the reasonsss that I am not qualified is that I am no lawyer. ;-) Thanx, Paul