Re: [PATCH] [v5] Documentation: Provide guidelines for tool-generated content

[Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 10:51 AM <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Sasha Levin wrote:
> [..]
> > With a rule like the above, 1700+ contributors would have not been able to send
> > their patch in.
>
> Good point, I am not suggesting a Reviewed-by hurdle, but can see it
> reading that way. I expect that there will always be a significant class
> of contributions that will never need author trust to be accepted. Yes,
> would need to be careful not to destroy that wellspring of new
> contributors.

You brought up an excellent point and I think it should be documented
in submitting-patches.rst:
A developer "should be able to demonstrate the
ability to substantively review a contribution of similar complexity
before expecting the kernel community to engage in earnest".

In bpf and netdev communities we ask developers to participate
in code reviews and publish metrics:
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/?q=s%3A%22bpf+development+stats%22

A bit gamified rankings, but the message is clear:
want to land patches faster? participate in code reviews!
It reduces maintainers load and demonstrates that code-reviewing
developers actually understand the code, builds maintainer's trust.