Re: [MAINTAINERS / KERNEL SUMMIT] AI patch review tools

[Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1081 bytes --]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2025 at 02:47:52PM +0000, Bird, Tim wrote:

> I agree.
> We don't even have the resolve to get contributors to run checkpatch.pl
> (a freely available and imminently accessible tool).
> I think it would be illustrative to figure out what the barriers are to that, or what a proper
> incentive structure would be (and why we're missing it), before tackling the AI review issue.

I think anyone who cares already does get contributors to run whatever
tools by virtue of pushing back when that doesn't happen, if people
aren't running checkpatch it's because the maintainers they're sending
things to don't care.  For example I don't really care if people run
checkpatch but I do get a bit grumpy at people for missing some of the
audio specific tests, and the flow people are describing with the
networking CI is similar.

> There are open-source, locally runnable models out there.  They currently don't yield
> results that are as good as the large proprietary models, but they'll get better over time.

I think you mean open weights rather than open source there.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]