From: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <linux@treblig.org>
Cc: Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org>,
corbet@lwn.net, workflows@vger.kernel.org, josh@joshtriplett.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] docs: submitting-patches: (AI?) Tool disclosure tag
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2025 14:20:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202507241418.34AFD28C@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aIKhvubVqgeXIlrj@gallifrey>
On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 09:12:30PM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> * Kees Cook (kees@kernel.org) wrote:
> > [...]
> > do for Coccinelle or other scripts. It's a bit buried in the Researcher
> > Guidelines[1], but we have explicitly asked for details about tooling:
> >
> > When sending patches produced from research, the commit logs should
> > contain at least the following details, so that developers have
> > appropriate context for understanding the contribution.
> > ...
> > Specifically include details about any testing, static or dynamic
> > analysis programs, and any other tools or methods used to perform the
> > work.
> >
> > Maybe that needs to be repeated in SubmittingPatches?
>
> 'produced from research' is narrowing things down a bit too much I think
> when it's people using the tools as their normal way of working.
Right -- as currently written we have the explicit guideline for
"produced from research" and kind of an unwritten rule to detail any
complex tools involved for regular development (e.g. Coccinelle,
syzkaller, etc). We could generalize the existing statement and repeat
it in a better location?
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-24 21:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-24 17:54 linux
2025-07-24 19:07 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2025-07-24 20:45 ` Kees Cook
2025-07-24 21:06 ` Laurent Pinchart
2025-07-24 21:12 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2025-07-24 21:20 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2025-07-24 23:45 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-24 23:54 ` Kees Cook
2025-07-25 0:55 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2025-07-25 1:06 ` Sasha Levin
2025-07-25 1:20 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2025-07-25 1:52 ` Sasha Levin
2025-07-25 2:02 ` Steven Rostedt
2025-07-25 2:39 ` Sasha Levin
2025-07-25 11:29 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2025-07-25 11:37 ` Laurent Pinchart
2025-07-25 11:49 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2025-07-25 17:45 ` Al Viro
2025-07-25 22:40 ` Sasha Levin
2025-07-25 23:29 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=202507241418.34AFD28C@keescook \
--to=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=konstantin@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@treblig.org \
--cc=workflows@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox