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 CDA34158DAC for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2025 23:42:18 +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=1754955738; cv=none; b=HnjIguD4sqlhWW7HyLYXKE9xSRoGvog+c/binMU6qRHbmUkvL0VaTZv2fPvvdDSdKlWh5x0m+6BTlr/8QmCH7nK07ytYEn9XMVSBj8RejxkO5onVQkTEhV4oJbrhQ6a9Pux7vu/iDeRaSEdzRSrNg6I6QKkdTUJofoc016eD2fA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1754955738; c=relaxed/simple; bh=XTwcXBilEcdlJh7I6dV0Yc1xvgIaX8iiOOnafvD5slc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=TtZd2WQMe+xLE8pK49ukUBlKoYc0B3429wVy/SX2JoL9afU7hIMF61WgZvkCforT4q7OzvqWcrVKXbAU67oQNU6BNJtApM3mZ38uGuuVd0FnG20ggDWDt31yh9itz+/7u8N54GOtnCRQmtndp4KWoF+2B5SjYT6XigQtFSjJOoc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=XhWfefAG; 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="XhWfefAG" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 924E6C4CEED; Mon, 11 Aug 2025 23:42:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1754955738; bh=XTwcXBilEcdlJh7I6dV0Yc1xvgIaX8iiOOnafvD5slc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=XhWfefAG58Pv7k8sPvIQOMlicSDHzv+7kLNy4WMRc686iaztf4v+llFM1B+NwsBvm 89y2G7Dlqzdd8QFPlnfmg0GfETsq64p1bnKhrsHWC57xYLIiGhJI+CN2x1SsB55Vni s/Kz6/nTozw6ZEelnr9KhVKM2VPyUGY+BRovds4xqpxrHK49EicTx8Fg5qVB5WUpVh s9BLcV6lMVQjHXtMj1Z+PpUg+GWDiR/7vyzXuxfKnZW0mlxADucR4FSQacIJL6IG2B /XYpV/FoYxt+j4zYVq0poDyWzqYjJY2/sxOGtvDN3vFvsF5Da66W+KuTldIDRQ0rAH zmK0taVekzXZQ== Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3A8BCCE0965; Mon, 11 Aug 2025 16:42:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2025 16:42:18 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Luis Chamberlain Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski , Sasha Levin , Jiri Kosina , ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Annotating patches containing AI-assisted code Message-ID: 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 04:22:21PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 03:51:48PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 03:11:47PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > > b) seems kind of too late > > > > Why? > > One cannot assume at this point AI generated code has not been merged > into any large scale open source project. I agree that it is quite possible that AI-generated code has already been merged into large-scale open-source projects, including the Linux kernel. I do not see why this possibility requires us to merge AI-generated code in the future. > I am also not sure it can be stopped. As noted below, nothing is bullet proof. > > > c) If something like the Generated-by tag is used, and we trust it, then > > > if we do want to side against merging AI generated code, that's perhaps our > > > only chance at blocking that type of code. Its however not bullet proof. > > > > Nothing is bullet proof. ;-) > > Agreed, and I think the legal concerns over AI code use are just as weak. I > just don't see it holidng up long term. That is quite possible. But on what are you basing that legal opinion? Also, even if you have a valid legal opinion that stands up long-term, situations that prove to be just fine in the long term can be extremely uncomfortable in the meantime. > My expectations are that eventually foundation AI models will simply state they > use permissively licensed code for training, and be done with these concerns. > > Until then -- we just have wild speculations and I can't see any > sensible case ending up in court wanting to avoid AI code in open source. I don't know about open source, but they tell me that related cases are already in court. Yes, there was a recent decision that was favorable to your position, which is great, but not necessarily either definitive or final. > > At the same time, I have no idea whether or not a Generated-by tag is > > a good idea. > > I do that to make it crystal clear for a project maintainer when I use it. I understand and sympathize with your intent, but I do not have an informed opinion on the risks in either direction. Thanx, Paul