linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] README: restructure with role-based documentation and guidelines

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: <aJjM1oF8hJJrqDhN@lappy>
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2025 12:46:14 -0400
From: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: corbet@....net, josh@...htriplett.org, kees@...nel.org,
	konstantin@...uxfoundation.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	workflows@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] README: restructure with role-based documentation
 and guidelines

On Sun, Aug 10, 2025 at 08:44:58AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
>On Sat, 2025-08-09 at 19:40 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> Reorganize README to provide targeted documentation paths for different
>> user roles including developers, researchers, security experts,
>> maintainers, and AI coding assistants. Add quick start section and
>> essential docs links.
>>
>> Include proper attribution requirements for AI-assisted contributions
>> using Assisted-by tags with agent details and tools used.
>
>Nicely done.

Thanks Joe!

>Perhaps the 'Assisted-by:' tag should not be limited to AI
>assistance but could also be used when accepted notes were
>given on any revised patch submission.

The suggestions from the previous patches around expanding this to be a
list of tools rather than just "AI" made sense, this is the example I
gave in the cover letter:

	Assisted-by: Claude-claude-3-opus-20240229 checkpatch

I find something like that useful because it tells me from the get-go
that the submitter ran checkpatch on it (without having to spend a line
in the commit message saying the same).

I'm not sure about mixing human feedback into this, it might be
difficult to interpert it later.

It might work more naturally as an extension of Reviewed-by?

	Reviewed-by: Developer A <a@b.c> # Improved the XYZ algorithm

>Oh, and maybe a checkpatch update like this?
>---
> scripts/checkpatch.pl | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
>diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>index e722dd6fa8ef3..d17661141da79 100755
>--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
>@@ -641,6 +641,7 @@ our $signature_tags = qr{(?xi:
> 	Reviewed-by:|
> 	Reported-by:|
> 	Suggested-by:|
>+	Assisted-by:|
> 	To:|
> 	Cc:
> )};

Yup, makes sense! I'll start including checkpatch updates going forward.

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha