[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260113114450.GEaWYwMh_v2K-nJMZ8@fat_crate.local>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 12:44:50 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree
On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 12:31:26PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> oops. When triaging Subjects, something which is clearly x86 gets less
> love.
Right. We definitely need to improve 2-way communication when we have
patch(sets) touching cross-tree.
> I'm optimistic. Did you see Mathieu's review of a Gemini review?
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/6fbb17fe-f2b1-4233-9834-5a5020cd87b3@efficios.com
Right.
At the same time, we need reviewers of the AI review because I did see very
persuasive explanations about something which is simply not true. I'd prefer
if the AI said "I don't know" than hallucinating. Especially for patch review.
> Yeah. I've been paying a lot of attention to the review economy
> lately, I'm hopeful we can do some things to help level the playing
> field, take load off those few who do so much of it. Early days.
Yap.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists