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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250731031701.3609-1-hdanton@sina.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2025 11:17:00 +0800
From: Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: 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, 30 Jul 2025 18:59:09 +0100 Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 01:46:47PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> 
> > Similarily the argument around not trusting the code is equivalent to
> > not trusting the person who sent the code in. AI doesn't send patches on
> > it's own - humans do. This is basically saying "I didn't even look at
> > your patch because I don't trust you".
> 
> One name: Markus Elfring.  Ever tried to reason with that one?  Or Hillf
> Danton, for that matter.
> 
Frankly I delivered nothing with Signed-off-by to you for couple of
years even though I can communicate well with syzbot. And with nothing
to do with "trust you", simply because the patch could make no sense at
best even if they are from the trust cycle. I am not so tame to get into
any silver cycle/cage.

Hillf Danton