linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add agent coding assistant configuration to Linux kernel

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: <d9564214-49d6-4129-976f-4fba123a8a31@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2025 20:16:09 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, corbet@....net, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	workflows@...r.kernel.org, josh@...htriplett.org, kees@...nel.org,
	konstantin@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <linux@...blig.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add agent coding assistant configuration to Linux
 kernel

On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 07:04:13PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 01:32:20PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> > If the maintainer starts getting too many submissions, then they can update
> > the MAINTAINERS file to say "stop all AI patches to me!". Just like we have
> > an opt-in for to not be part of the get_maintainer.pl "touched this file"
> > with the .get_maintainer.ignore script.

> Again I really don't think this aligns with what maintainers will want.

I suspect this may be more varied than you're expecting, and that the
attitudes of people maintaining core kernel things are going to be on
average different to those of people working more with driver code.  TBH
I'm also concerned about submitters just silently using this stuff
anyway regardless of what we say, from that point of view there's
something to be said for encouraging people to be open and honest about
it so it can be taken into consideration when looking at the changes
that get sent.

This is all modulo the general licensing and other non-technical issues
of course.

> But again I think that is better settled or at least addressed at the
> maintainers summit.

I do expect that it'll be discussed there.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)