From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) (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 8345F500942; Thu, 8 Jan 2026 14:49:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.134.164.83 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767883767; cv=none; b=IOsG3NGEMxfqX4+ys3wP6FFuHRP/PewPC7JOK+1X07DL1oP9R1wBoyYYKWbJz8eSrX/Z+D5N6IjTIkth+fRnFcbhf3Z05Sb0fAob2id2EnSGkTogPKKk/FdKMbLXMryD/hdjCZ55++2ySl8+ySTln2CUQvGXHhLEfKFIAVyt934= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767883767; c=relaxed/simple; bh=STgSsIB23dKPIa98YsLv4Dw6Ve+Siz95Dle1zSVbB8A=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=U1mKDewEsLZsTWPaGK0ixI1qfqWbyvaqZjuJAtigJ7X+Irvq1/I6nV64YhW+5ZYDGKdsmeedgJYBA6KXERDyQj1iWdWhS+d86TGJxHxhAzGD0LIXrMbe1cEmbYb+60U7DCCSPi4XJrkZH/45lG5Ep+Tu+E464FMyJwe9on9fQB4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=inria.fr; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=inria.fr; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=inria.fr header.i=@inria.fr header.b=vBtlYdfr; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.134.164.83 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=inria.fr Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=inria.fr Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=inria.fr header.i=@inria.fr header.b="vBtlYdfr" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=inria.fr; s=dc; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=fdrLd79Mo5p2aC5Oxr+75v/OGdzxyTp4flifQOZAG8c=; b=vBtlYdfrrEf5N9RYR3fJtrtr3BadS9raVMBxgzoXZ/J/V12hsbG+TO8h 5TyJr3rQLAr/HrO286skGMEhWaaqDSmSAcTxUnAyYwUJyIPIUC4iaHEXC IijtFm/O8V+XKeufUukC5SoEPyDDR+l/sxHxKCd+dkpTY78XQGbvg31F+ g=; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 8tiNBkNQT8+Og8ZOC97Hmw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: E7hLJLoERCutdnsZDb3UkA== Authentication-Results: mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none; spf=SoftFail smtp.mailfrom=julia.lawall@inria.fr; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) d=inria.fr X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,211,1763420400"; d="scan'208";a="257640710" Received: from wifi-eduroam-84-204.paris.inria.fr ([128.93.84.204]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Jan 2026 15:48:15 +0100 Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 15:48:14 +0100 (CET) From: Julia Lawall To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" cc: James Bottomley , Lorenzo Stoakes , Dave Hansen , Dave Hansen , Dave Hansen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan , Kees Cook , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Miguel Ojeda , Luis Chamberlain , SeongJae Park , Dan Williams , Steven Rostedt , NeilBrown , Theodore Ts'o , Sasha Levin , Jonathan Corbet , Vlastimil Babka , workflows@vger.kernel.org, ksummit@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v3] Documentation: Provide guidelines for tool-generated content In-Reply-To: <20260108085215-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> Message-ID: <6041b4b8-303a-f12b-24ea-92b836b7a025@inria.fr> References: <20260106205105.4037716-1-dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> <1e982055-47c2-43d1-a919-93b3e59f2ed0@lucifer.local> <93aadf2b-0df4-49eb-91fd-b401b44ce3af@sr71.net> <1c74353c-40de-4d0b-a517-92a94f8b4af8@lucifer.local> <6c71554c-4fa1-4b99-9d46-2f1a2ecc1b7f@intel.com> <611c4a95-cbf2-492c-a991-e54042cf226a@lucifer.local> <20260108085215-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 8 Jan 2026, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 08:17:09AM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > > > +you are expected to understand and to be able to defend everything > > > you > > > +submit. If you are unable to do so, maintainers may choose to reject > > > your > > > +series outright. > > > > And I thing the addition would apply to any tool used to generate a > > patch set whether AI or not. > > Exactly. I saw my share of "fix checkpatch warning" slop. This is no > different. I guess that most maintainers can easily recognize a patch that was motivated by checkpatch, Coccinelle, smatch etc. Then the review can be informed by previous experience with the tool. Will the same be the case for AI? Or does it not matter? julia