linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 00/22] Kernel API specification framework

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87qzz0aaw1.fsf@pelicano.edge2.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 19:43:42 -0700
From: Jake Edge <jake@....net>
To: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,  linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
  linux-api@...r.kernel.org,  workflows@...r.kernel.org,  tools@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 00/22] Kernel API specification framework

Hi Sasha,

On Tue, Jun 24 2025 14:07 -0400, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> wrote:

> Hey folks,
>
> This is a second attempt at a "Kernel API Specification" framework,
> addressing the feedback from the initial RFC and expanding the scope
> to include sysfs attribute specifications.

In light of your talk at OSS last week [1] (for non-subscribers [2]), I
am wondering if any of this code has been written by coding LLMs.  It
seems like the kind of unpleasant boilerplate that they are said to be
good at generating, but also seems like an enormous blob of "code" to
review. What is the status of this specification in that regard?

thanks!

jake

[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/1026558/
[2] https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/1026558/914fa4ec5964b0c5/

-- 
Jake Edge - LWN - jake@....net - https://lwn.net